2. It is recognized that the judgment defendant recognized the crime of this case and reflects the crime of this case, and that there is no record of punishment for the same crime.

However, the crime of this case is committed one time at the left face of the police who was reported by the defendant, and thus, in order to establish the state’s legal order and eradicate the light of public authority, the crime of interference with the performance of official duties, such as this case, requires strict punishment. The defendant prices the face of the police officer directly damaged, etc., and the defendant has been punished several times as violent crimes, and the defendant has been punished several times as violent crimes, and further, on August 18, 2016, he was sentenced to one year and six months as a special robbery on August 9, 201, and the execution of the punishment of this case was completed on August 9, 2017, even during the period of repeated crimes, and thus, the crime is not good, and the defendant’s age, sex, motive and means of the crime of this case, the motive and consequence of the crime of this case, and the circumstances after the crime, etc. do not seem to have been too unfair.

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.

Provided, That the burden of litigation costs shall be governed by the proviso of Article 186 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act.