The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Inasmuch as there exists a need for arrest at the time when the defendant was arrested in the act of committing an offense, arrest in the act of committing an offense was lawful, and accordingly, the charge of the injury of this case and obstruction of the performance of official duties against the defendant should be found guilty.

On the contrary, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles.

The sentence (500,000 won) sentenced by the court below against the defendant is too unhutiled.

Judgment

On the basis of the facts duly admitted and examined evidence, the court below held that there was a concern about the necessity of arrest, i.e., escape or destruction of evidence as an offender of the crime of interference with the business as a result of the crime of interference with the business.

It is difficult to see that the arrest of the criminal in the act of committing the crime outside of the main place of the judgment against the defendant cannot be deemed lawful, and so long, it cannot be deemed that the arrest of the criminal in the act of crime committed the crime of obstructing the duty and obstructing the performance of official duties of the criminal defendant cannot

Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the relevant legal principles, the lower court’s determination of facts is just and acceptable, and it did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine as alleged by the prosecutor.

As to the unfair argument of sentencing, the sentencing is decided within a reasonable and appropriate scope, taking into account the factors that are conditions for the sentencing prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, on the basis of statutory penalty.

However, considering the unique area of sentencing of the first trial that is respected under the principle of trial priority and the principle of directness that our criminal litigation law takes, and the nature of the ex post facto review of the appellate court, the first trial sentencing judgment is made in consideration of the factors and sentencing criteria in the first trial sentencing process.