Therefore, since the dismissal part of the judgment of the court below is separated and confirmed, the scope of this court's judgment is limited to the conviction part.

2. The decision of the court below on the gist of the grounds for appeal (five months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

3. The circumstances that can be considered, such as the fact that the Defendant led to the confession of the instant crime and reflects the mistake, are recognized.

However, when the Defendant was arrested as a flagrant offender of the crime of this case and went into the police box, the crime of this case was committed against a police officer in the process of carrying out legitimate official duties, and the nature of the crime is not good, and it is necessary to strictly punish the Defendant in order to eliminate the public power and establish the legal order. The Defendant has the record of having been punished several times due to the crime of violence, including the Defendant already been punished three times due to the same kind of obstruction of performance of official duties. In addition, considering various sentencing conditions, such as the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, environment, background leading to the crime, means and method of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, it cannot be deemed that the sentence imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.

4. As such, 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.