The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The instant act of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles was conducted in the course of resisting a police officer’s illegal performance of duties to prevent the Defendant, etc. who caused a boomed booming, and the Defendant’s act is unlawful, and thus, the Defendant’s act constitutes a crime of obstruction of performance of official duties, or constitutes a justifiable act.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (fine 4 million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The crime of obstruction of performance of official duties under Article 136 of the Criminal Act is established only when the performance of official duties is legitimate. Here, legitimate performance of official duties refers to not only where the act belongs to the abstract authority of the public official, but also where the act satisfies the legal requirements and methods for specific performance of duties.

In addition, Article 6(1) of the former Act on the Performance of Duties by Police Officers (amended by Act No. 12600, May 20, 2014) provides that “If a police officer deems that a criminal act is about to be committed in front of the police officer, the police officer may issue a warning to the person concerned to prevent the criminal act, and may restrain the police officer from doing such act in urgent cases because the act is likely to cause harm to human life and body or cause serious damage to property.” However, the provision on the restraint of the police officer is a provision on the basis of the power factual act in which the police officer immediately forces the police for the prevention of the crime, i.e., urgent obstacle to the snow, and it is necessary to remove the police officer in front of the snow, and it is difficult to achieve the purpose by issuing an order to order the police officer without any negligence under the circumstances where it is difficult to do so by exercising his/her power

(Supreme Court Decision 2007Do9794 Decided November 13, 2008). However, whether a police officer’s restraint measure is legitimate or not is a measure.