The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant: (a) took the arms of the police officer F as his hand; (b) took the arms in hand; and (c) took the arms as his hand; and (d) took the son’s hand, but there is no fact that the Defendant was pushed the chest.

In addition, the above act is not an act of removing F's hand, which takes the arms of the living together with the company, or an act of taking the F's hand by carrying the body of the defendant's hand, or an act of putting the hand on the company's hand, which is merely an act to put the hand on the company's hand, and it does not exercise a tangible power that is likely to obstruct the execution of official duties.

There is room for it to be an act that does not violate social rules.

Therefore, the lower court convicted the Defendant of interference with the performance of official duties, or erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby rendering a judgment.

2. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the defendant committed assault by his hand as stated in the facts constituting the crime in the judgment of the court below, by taking advantage of the police officer F's arms and arms sent out according to the 112 report, and booming the chest, thereby obstructing the police officer F's legitimate performance of duties concerning the handling of reports by the 112 report.

In addition, the above act does not violate social rules, considering the fact that the defendant acted as mentioned above with the awareness of the safety of the living together with the dead village where the defendant was boomed.

shall not be determined.

Therefore, the defendant's mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles are without merit.

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