The judgment of the court below is reversed.

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

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. “Assault”, which is the form of an act of obstructing the performance of official duties by mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, should be interpreted as a broad concept including the exercise of indirect tangible force against public officials in the course of performing official duties. However, the Defendant’s act of preventing the progress of the vehicle while playing in front of the patrol vehicle in spite of the police officer’s demand by blocking the front of the patrol vehicle, constitutes an indirect assault against public officials. In fact, the police officer’s act of obstructing the performance of official duties constitutes an indirect assault against public officials. As such, the crime of obstructing the performance of official duties is established.

Nevertheless, the lower court acquitted the Defendant of interference with the performance of official duties, and the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court against the Defendant (2 million won in penalty) is too uneased and unfair.

2. Determination on the misapprehension of facts and misapprehension of legal principles

A. In the crime of interference with the performance of official duties, the term “Assault” refers to the exercise of direct tangible power against public officials as well as indirect tangible power exercise (see Supreme Court Decision 98Do662, May 12, 1998, etc.). B. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, ① Police Officer F of the police box affiliated with the police station E box in the Modong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-gu sent to the Defendant after receiving a report of 112 that the Defendant was able to take a bath, but the Defendant continued to take a patrol outside of the police station without complying with the report, ② the police officer fell under the police officer’s behavior that the police officer want to take close to the police officer, and the police officer went under the direction that the police officer want to take a patrol within his jurisdiction.