1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On June 6, 2017, Police Officers B, C, and D (hereinafter “instant police officers”) affiliated with a district police station within the jurisdiction of the official police station were dispatched to the E Building Fdong at the time of official residence upon receipt of a report from the Plaintiff that the Plaintiff was making a disturbance.

B. The Plaintiff was 2 to 3 times sealed the chest part of B's chest part of B, and the police officers arrested the Plaintiff.

C. On September 29, 2017, the Plaintiff was sent to the Daejeon District Public Prosecutor’s Office under the suspicion of obstruction of performance of official duties, and on the ground that “The Plaintiff’s exercise of force against B appears to be merely a passive resistance, and there is no evidence to acknowledge that the Plaintiff was sealed with B’s chest with the intent of attack against the police officer.”

On October 31, 2018, the Plaintiff filed a complaint with the Daejeon District Public Prosecutor’s Office on the charge of violating the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, etc. (Unlawful Arrest) against the instant police officials, and the prosecutor in charge decided that the instant police officials were suspected of having committed a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes on the ground that “it is difficult to readily conclude that the instant police officials were arrested with the recognition of the fact that they deviate from their discretion without considerable rationality, and that there is no other evidence to acknowledge that the instant police officials had the intention to abuse their authority,” and both the Plaintiff’

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion demanded that the police officer of this case be informed of what contents the report was received. However, B did not inform the police officer of this fact and did scambling to the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff did so. The Plaintiff scambling the chest part of B from 2 to 3 times to defend himself.

However, B did not make any notification of the principle of scarcity.