If the content of intimidation is minor, it does not constitute an obstruction of performance of official duties.

Since intimidation is minor, if a public official who is the other party is not opened, the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties is not established.

Article 136 of the Criminal Act

Supreme Court Decision 4294 Form12 Delivered on May 17, 1962

Defendant

Prosecutor

Military support in the first instance court, the Jeonju District Court Decision 69No981 delivered on March 31, 1970

The appeal is dismissed.

We examine the Prosecutor’s Grounds of Appeal

In light of the record, it can be said that there is no evidence to prove that there is an illegality in documentary evidence in the judgment of the original court that there is no sufficient evidence to prove that the defendant "I will have died while I go back to the military."

In addition, a threat in the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties means a threat of harm and injury that may cause a person to feel (the establishment of such crime is sufficient when there is such threat, and it does not require that the victim has made a fear of harm and injury in reality). (See Supreme Court Decision 4294Ma12 delivered on May 17, 622) Since the threat is minor, if it is to the extent that a public official who is the other party does not open, such intimidation does not constitute the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties. Thus, in light of the verbal abuse of the defendant's above instruction, which is legally recognized by the original judgment, such verbal abuse is minor as a threat of harm and injury, and thus, it cannot be deemed sufficient to establish the crime of obstruction of official duties, there is no error in the judgment of the original court that did not err in its judgment.

There is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles like theory in the original judgment.

Without merit, this appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges by applying Article 390 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

The presiding judge of the Supreme Court of Korea (Presiding Judge) shall be the red net shots and the white shots