2. Determination of the Defendant recognized the instant crime, and the instant crime ought to be considered in relation to the crime of interference with the execution of official duties, which became final and conclusive on January 19, 2017, and the relationship between the crime of interference with the execution of official duties and the group subsequent to Article 38 of the so-called Criminal Act, and the

In addition, the defendant seems to have committed the crime of this case in contingency under the influence of alcohol, and the degree of the assault is relatively minor.

On the other hand, the crime of this case was committed by assaulting a police officer who wears his uniform and performs official duties, and its nature is not good in light of the content and result of the crime, and the need to wear a social warning against the danger of public authority.

In addition, while the defendant was under criminal trial for the same crime, he/she is likely to be subject to criticism by committing another crime of this case.

In light of the above conditions unfavorable or favorable to the defendant, the circumstances after the crime, the age of the defendant, sexual conduct, environment, and all other factors of sentencing as shown in the argument of this case, the punishment imposed by the court below against the defendant is too unreasonable, and therefore, the above argument by the defendant 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.