2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and where the sentencing of the first instance does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The Defendant was punished by imprisonment for the same kind of crime (one time) and suspended execution (two times) and was punished by violent crimes, as well as the record that the Defendant was punished by imprisonment for the same crime, and even the instant crime constitutes a same repeated crime.

In order to establish the law and order of the State and eradicate the public peace, it is necessary to severely punish a crime that interferes with the performance of official duties. On the other hand, the defendant is habitually repeating and repeating violent crimes in light of the law and the defendant is not subject to strict liability corresponding thereto.

In addition, considering all the factors of sentencing as shown in the records and arguments of this case, such as the defendant's age, occupation, family relation, living environment, circumstances after the crime, etc., even if considering that the degree of assault committed by the defendant to a police officer is not hot, the sentence of the court below against the defendant is not heavy.

3. Accordingly, 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.