The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of two million won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) of the lower court’s punishment (an amount of KRW 3 million) is too unreasonable.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for ex officio appeal, we examine as to the obstruction of business ex officio.

A. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant called the victim C, who was a public official, who had worked in the electronic tracking team B at the Chuncheon Protection Observation Station located at 440 m. 64 m. Do-ro 440 m. from January 29, 2015, when around 01:15, the Defendant called the Defendant for a filling of a portable tracking device at a sufficient amount of filling.

B. Ch. C. H. H. H. H. H. H. H. H. H. H. H. H. H. H. H. H. H. H. Hing the disturbance by force over about 40 minutes, thereby obstructing the victim’s official duties.

B. It is reasonable to interpret that the Criminal Act, separate from the crime of interference with the performance of official duties, separate from the crime of interference with the performance of official duties, the purpose of the Criminal Act is to punish public officials only when they interfere with the execution of official duties by means of violence, intimidation, or fraudulent means with respect to official duties. Therefore, it is reasonable to interpret that an act of interference with the performance of official duties by a public official cannot be regarded as interference with the performance of official duties (see Supreme Court Decision 2009Do4166, Nov. 19, 2009). Accordingly, even if based on the facts charged itself, the Defendant interfered with the performance of official duties by the victim C who is a public official, and the Defendant’s act does not constitute a interference with the formation of the crime

3. The judgment of the court below is reversed in its entirety by treating the business interference with which the defendant is not guilty and the remaining crimes in the judgment of the court below as concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act. Thus, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's unfair decision on the defendant's unfair decision on the sentencing, and the judgment below is reversed and it is again decided after pleading as follows.