A. The Defendant was not aware of the fact that he was a police officer on the front side of the taxi and did not know the fact that he was a police officer, and there was no awareness and intention of the police officer who was performing his duties on the front door.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing (three million won of a fine) is too unreasonable.

2. In full view of the following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, it is deemed that the Defendant had an awareness and intent to interfere with the execution of duties by assaulting a police officer with negligence.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of mistake is without merit.

① Police Officers E consistently made a statement that corresponds to the facts charged in the instant case from an investigative agency to the court of the court below, and the aforementioned statement about the major part of the crime, the situation after the crime, and the Defendant’s act, etc. is specific and natural. There is no special circumstance to view that the lower court’s judgment that deemed the credibility of the above statement was clearly erroneous.

② According to the CD image, the Defendant: (a) while riding a taxi, the Defendant appears to be “string,” and the police officer’s answer to the police officer as “I am,” (14 seconds to 16 seconds); (b) the Defendant’s answer to the “I am,” and the Defendant’s answer to the “I am, I am,” and the chief door is confirmed (16 seconds to 17 seconds); (c) the Defendant appears to have clearly perceived that the police officer was a police officer on the front side of the police officer in dialogue with the police officer before the instant case (in addition, in order to move to the front door, I am unable to see the outside inevitably); and (d) in such circumstances, it appears that it would be easy to easily predict that if the chief door is opened to the police officer, it would be at the price of the police officer by the door.

(3) The defendant was dispatched to the military at the time due to the problem of payment of taxi expenses.