beta
Text
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the mistake of facts and misapprehension of the legal principle) is that the Defendant was a fine unpaid at the time of the instant case, and thus, the police officers’ act of having the Defendant compelled to arrest the Defendant to a police station for the purpose of executing a fine constitutes legitimate performance of official duties, and the act of assaulting the police officer as stated in the facts charged constitutes obstruction of performance of official duties.
2. Determination on the grounds for appeal
A. The detention in a workhouse in accordance with the relevant legal principles of fines is substantially the same as the type of imprisonment, and the provisions on the enforcement of a punishment are applied mutatis mutandis to the enforcement of the sentence (Article 492 of the Criminal Procedure Act). Therefore, a prosecutor, who is the executive body of a punishment, may summon a party who has not been detained, for the enforcement of the sentence, and, if the party does not comply with the summons, may issue a warrant of execution of punishment (Article 473). In this case, the provisions on the detention of the defendant as stipulated in Chapter 9 of Part I of the Criminal Procedure Act shall apply mutatis mutandis to the enforcement of a warrant of execution of punishment (Article 475). Thus, in order for a judicial police officer to arrest a person subject to a fine for the enforcement of the detention in a workhouse, the warrant of execution issued by the prosecutor shall be presented to the party (see Articles 85(1) and 2010Do8591, Oct. 14, 2010).
(See Article 85(3) and Supreme Court Decision 2012Do2349 Decided September 12, 2013). B.
Judgment
According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, all the facts and circumstances of the court below are recognized, and a fine is imposed solely on the ground that the defendant is not liable for a fine, unless a writ of execution of punishment for attracting the defendant was issued, according to the final and conclusive fine, until the occurrence of the case