The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Regarding the fact-finding ① interference with each business, the Defendant did not exercise any power against the victims or interfere with the victims’ work on the same date and time as the facts charged in this part of the charges.

(2) As to each insult, although the Defendant made the same remarks as the facts charged, the Defendant did not have any intention of insult.

③ With respect to interference with the performance of official duties, the Defendant resisted against the police’s unlawful performance of official duties, and constitutes a justifiable act.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (one year of suspended sentence, three years of suspended sentence, observation of protection, and fine of two million won for one year) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts

A. The following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court and the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the trial court (related to the above assertion) and the trial court: (i) the victims have consistently obstructed their business by avoiding disturbance, such as having the criminal investigation agency to keep sound and take a bath, etc., and stated to the effect that they correspond to the facts charged of the obstruction of each business; and (ii) with respect to the obstruction of one’s business on June 14, 2017, H, a police officer called upon at the time, upon receiving a report, made a statement in the court of the lower court to the effect that it was impossible to find the Defendant while photographing the victim from 30 minutes to 30 minutes before the victim’s cell phone.

I saw that it was in fact

In relation to the obstruction of self-operation on July 3, 2017, a witness X and Y made a statement at an investigative agency to the effect that the Defendant expressed his or her desire to take a cell phone image before the victim K, and that the CCTV image taken at the time corresponds to the victim K’s statement, ④ in relation to the interference with self-operation on August 16, 2017, the CCTV image taken at the time corresponds to the victim’s statement, and ⑤ in relation to the interference with self-operation on July 6, 2017, AA dispatched by the police officer at the time when the Defendant arrives at the scene at the law of the lower court.