2. The crime of this case was committed by the police officer who was called out after receiving a report on the disturbance by shouldering the glass window in the apartment at a 2-clock radius from the new wall, etc., and was spawned home, thereby obstructing the police officer's performance of official duties by cutting the arms of the police officer, spawning the spath, and destroying the spath, and thus obstructing the police officer's performance of official duties. Thus, the defendant recognized all of the crimes of this case and reflected it.

However, in the past, there are unfavorable circumstances such as the fact that the defendant has been punished twice for the same crime, the fact that there was no agreement with the police officer damaged by the defendant, and as a result of the application of the sentencing guidelines by the Sentencing Commission of the Supreme Court, the recommended punishment for the crime of this case is between June and January 1, and the court below is within the scope of the above recommended punishment, and the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, circumstances and circumstances of the crime, and the means and result of the crime, the circumstances after the crime were committed, and all the conditions of sentencing as shown in the records and arguments of this case, it is difficult to view that the court below's punishment is too

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

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