2. Considering the following facts: (a) the Defendant recognized all of the instant crimes; (b) the Defendant committed the instant crime; (c) the sentence for which suspension of execution has already been suspended after the judgment becomes final and conclusive; (d) there is a mother to support the Defendant; and (e) suffering from pulmonary tuberculosis, etc., the instant crime is committed by being provided alcoholic beverages, etc. from the victim without any intent or ability to pay the price; and (d) the police officer dispatched upon receipt of the said 12 report requests the Defendant to present his identification card; (c) thereby obstructing the performance of official duties by taking a bath and assaulting the police officer; (d) there is a need for strict punishment against obstruction of performance of official duties in order to protect the State’s legitimate function and establish a sound social order; (e) the record of punishment for the Defendant has already been three times; and (e) the Defendant, in particular, was sentenced to suspension of execution to imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, by the Busan District Court on October 16, 2014.

Considering the above various circumstances and other circumstances, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, motive and background of the crime, and circumstances that are the conditions for sentencing as shown in the trial process, if the lower court’s conviction is affirmed, even if there are circumstances in which suspended sentence already finalized is invalidated, it cannot be deemed that the sentence of the lower court is too unreasonable.

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