A. Fact-misunderstanding, misunderstanding of legal principles 1) The Defendant did not spawn the police officer’s J, and spawn it only before the police box, and thus, the Defendant’s spawn away on the clothes of the J does not constitute a crime of obstructing the performance of official duties.

2) Despite the above circumstances, arresting the Defendant as a crime of obstructing the performance of official duties to J cannot be deemed legitimate execution of official duties. Accordingly, the Defendant’s resistance and resistance to the resistance by the police officer does not constitute a crime of obstructing the performance of official duties.

B. The punishment of the lower court (one hundred months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the photograph of the Defendant’s criminal intent taken to determine the misunderstanding of facts and the misapprehension of the legal doctrine, it is clear that the Defendant’s surface can be verified that the Defendant spreads well-being the bottom of the floor.

However, in full view of the other circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, namely, ① opening 2-3 of the 4-5 wells that the defendant brought in before the entrance of the I police box before the Defendant was taken, the court below consistently stated that the police officer’s failure to photograph the wells to the contrary side of the J, and ② the Defendant told the J that “to throw away the wells from the front face.” In full view of the following, the court below acknowledged the fact that the Defendant’s photographed the 4-5 wells that he brought in before the entrance of the I police box to the bottom of the J, and that the police officer consistently stated that the Defendant was frighted to the opposite side of the J.m., and that the Defendant told the J to “to throw away the wells from the front face.”

Therefore, the defendant's act constitutes a crime of interference with the execution of official duties. Therefore, arresting the defendant as a crime of interference with the execution of official duties is legitimate execution of official duties, and the defendant's act resisting against it also constitutes a crime of interference with the execution of

Therefore, the defendant's mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles are without merit.

B. The Defendant committed an offense during the period of repeated offense with respect to the illegal assertion of sentencing.