The defendant shall be innocent.

1. On October 12, 2013, the Defendant: (a) as an insurance solicitor; (b) filed a false report on the facts charged with the Defendant’s murdering of children; and (c) on October 21:48, 2013.

On October 12, 2013, at around 22:15, the Defendant: (a) arrested a flagrant offender on the back of the 21st west-gu Seoul Dongdaemun Police Station C District in front of the Dongdaemun-gu, Dongdaemun-gu, Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul, on the ground that he was arrested in the act of insultd against security guards within the 33th 21st knife of the patrol car belonging to the Dongdaemun-gu, Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul, Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul, and went between C District; (b) expressed that “Y-gu, I am, I am, I am, I am, I am, I am, I am, I am, I am.” The Defendant interfered with the police officer’s duties, such as quihing the face and part of the knife, I am, and assault the external knife.

2. The Defendant and the defense counsel argued to the effect that the Defendant’s voluntary act was forced by lending the voluntary act form on the ground that the Defendant reported false information at the time, and that the Defendant was arrested as a flagrant offender in the crime of insult, and that the Defendant’s act of illegal arrest by police officers was not committed with obstruction of performance of official duties.

The crime of obstruction of performance of official duties stipulated in Article 136 of the Criminal Code is established only when the execution of official duties is legitimate. Here, legitimate performance of official duties refers to not only the abstract authority of a public official but also the legal requirements and methods for specific performance of official duties. Thus, even if a person commits assault or intimidation against a public official performing an act of lack of legitimacy, it shall not be subject to the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2004Do4731, Oct. 28, 2005; 2008Do9926, Feb. 12, 2009). As long as it is difficult to deem the Defendant to have satisfied the lawful requirements for the arrest of the flagrant offender on the following grounds, the Defendant’s act of bringing the Defendant into the territory of the patrol vehicle.