2. The judgment appears to be against the defendant's mistake, the fact that the defendant agreed with the victim F in an investigative agency, and that the defendant fully repaid the amount of damage related to damage to public goods in the court below is recognized as favorable to the defendant.

However, in full view of the following: (a) the crime of this case was committed by the Defendant, who injured the victim, interfered with the performance of official duties of police officers dispatched therefrom; (b) the nature of the crime was damaged by public goods within the police box; and (c) the court below seems to have determined the sentence in consideration of the favorable circumstances for the Defendant; (d) there are no special circumstances or changes in circumstances that may be newly considered in sentencing after the pronouncement of the judgment below; and (e) other various sentencing conditions in the records and arguments, such as the Defendant’s age, character and character environment, and conditions before and after the crime

Therefore, the defendant's argument of sentencing is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.