All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant (1) misunderstanding of the facts or misunderstanding of the legal principles (the guilty part of the lower judgment) merely moved a vehicle to the right edge to cooperate with the police officer’s performance of duties, and there was no intention to obstruct the act of assault or the performance of official duties, and even though the above act of driving by the Defendant did not constitute assault against the crime of obstructing the performance of special official duties, the lower court convicted the Defendant of this part of the charges by misapprehending the legal principles

(2) The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (two years of suspended sentence in August) is too unreasonable.

B. Although the prosecutor’s (1) mismisunderstanding of the facts or misapprehension of the legal principles (the part not guilty in the lower judgment) demand for measurement by means of the method of demand for measurement under Article 44(2) of the Road Traffic Act can be recognized, the lower court determined that the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, thereby not

(2) The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence in the judgment of the court below, the defendant asserted as to the misapprehension of the facts or legal principles of the defendant, and the court below found the defendant's vehicle that the police officer called to the 112-report order and attached close to the direction of the chief right-hand side of the vehicle of the defendant, and the police officer M knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife. at the time.