2. It is recognized that the judgment defendant led to the confession of the crime and repented his mistake.

However, the crime of obstructing the performance of official duties of this case is an assaulting a police officer who performs his official duties and thus obstructing the performance of official duties, and thus, it is necessary to strictly punish the defendant in consideration of the recent situation of public authority. The defendant commits each of the crimes of this case without being aware of the fine over several times due to violent crimes, the defendant committed the crime of this case without being aware of the period of suspension of execution due to violent crimes even though he had been punished for suspension of execution, and the victim did not agree with the victim, the victim did not receive a letter, there is no change of circumstances that may otherwise determine the defendant's age, sex, environment, motive, means and consequence of each of the crimes of this case, and there is no other change of circumstances that can determine differently between the court below and the punishment at the time of the trial of this case, and considering the recommended range of sentencing guidelines set forth in the sentencing guidelines set forth in the arguments of this case such as the defendant's age, sex, environment, motive

Therefore, the defendant's assertion 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.