The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In the event of a mistake of facts, the Defendant: (a) sent a sign prohibiting parking and stopping on the roadside at the time of the instant case, and expressed a desire to the police officer; (b) however, there is no fact that the police officer’s arms are cut off, tightly cut off, tightly cut off the police officer’s arms, and walked to the police officer’s right to walk in the course of getting on the patrol vehicle after the patrol vehicle.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which convicted all the facts charged of this case is erroneous in misconception of facts.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts

A. The lower court denied the part of the facts charged by asserting that the Defendant acknowledged all the facts charged of the instant case as follows: “The Defendant did not agree to walk the police officer’s scam in the course of coming back with the police officer’s arms and going back with his body, and going on the patrol vehicle thereafter,” and that the Defendant’s statement made at the trial site at the time of the instant case at the time corresponds to the Defendant’s assertion.

B. However, in full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court and the lower court’s duly admitted and investigated evidence, it is recognized that the Defendant, as stated in the facts charged in the instant case, was able to take a bath for police officers, as well as to take the arms of police officers, fright the arms of the police officers, fright the police officers, and walk the police officer’s Hack to walk the police officer’s Hack in the course of carrying the patrol vehicle thereafter

Therefore, we do not accept the defendant's assertion of mistake.

1) According to the video image (Evidence No. 135 of the evidence record), which was submitted by a witness L, who recorded the situation at the time, submitted to an investigation agency by the witness, he/she can check the arms of police officers in the process of blocking police officers who the Defendant intended to arrest A, and check the body of police officers several times. The circumstances to deem that the above video was operated or dited are.