2. There are extenuating circumstances such as the Defendant’s confession of each of the instant crimes, and the Defendant’s agreement with the victim of the instant crime of obstructing the performance of official duties, and the police officers involved in the crime.

However, the crime of this case was committed by assaulting a police officer who solicited the defendant to return home from the defendant's main place of business in a way that the defendant obstructed his main business operations, and thus, in order to resolve the peace of the legitimate public authority and establish the law and order, it is necessary to strictly punish the crime of interference with the performance of official duties like this case. The defendant has been punished once as a fine, including punishment for violence-related crimes one time, seven times as a fine, and there is no change in circumstances that may be considered as a ground for sentencing in the trial, and there is no other change in circumstances that may be considered as a ground for sentencing in the trial, taking into account the defendant's age, sex, sex, environment, family relationship, means and consequence of the crime, the circumstances after the crime, etc., and all other circumstances that form the conditions for sentencing as shown in the theory of sentencing and changes, it is not deemed unfair because the sentence imposed by the court below is too excessive.

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.