The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the defendant was arrested as an offender in the act of insult before the earth at the expense of the police officer, and the defendant was arrested as an offender in the act of insult before the earth at the time of assaulting the police officer, and thus the defendant's act constitutes obstruction of the performance of official duties. Even if the defendant voluntarily enters the military court where he was not arrested in the earth, and the police officer voluntarily prevents him from leaving the earth, and subsequently, the defendant committed an assault against the police officer, the requirement for arresting the defendant as an offender in the act of insult was satisfied at the time, and from the standpoint of the police officer, the procedure of identification was required for the subsequent investigation. Thus, the police officer's arbitrary restraint of the defendant who voluntarily intends to leave from the police officer is lawful, and such police officer's act constitutes obstruction of the performance of official duties.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the charged facts of this case is erroneous in misconception of facts or misapprehension of legal principles.

2. Determination

A. The judgment of the court below acknowledged the fact that the defendant, while getting on and off a taxi in the E driving, driven the taxi in the D zone in this case, and thereafter expressed his intent to punish the defendant by entering the D zone, and the defendant also voluntarily enters the D zone according to E, and the defendant prevented the defendant from entering the D zone, and the defendant was only f of the defective police officer who intends to go out of the D zone, and the defendant was only f of the F's breast part, and the F arrested the defendant as a flagrant offender in the crime of insult and obstruction of performance of official duties. According to the above facts, according to the above facts, the defendant was not arrested until he attempted to go out of the D zone, and the defendant is free to leave the D zone freely, and the defendant is free to go out of the D zone.