The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. In light of the purport of the grounds for appeal, the following facts are considered: (a) the Defendant was in a state of full adoption; (b) the public officials’ damage is relatively minor; (c) the Defendant made a confession of all the facts charged in the instant case; and (d) the Defendant is in a position to support the parents and the first grade children of high school who are in the hospital and in the first grade of high school, etc., the sentence imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Even if considering the circumstances alleged by the Defendant, the crime of this case was committed on July 6, 2012 by the Defendant, upon receiving a report from a restaurant, and assault, intimidation, or bath on a police officer called out, and on November 2, 2012, the crime of this case was committed against the police officer who was called out upon receiving a report from the main place, and it is not easy to say that the crime was committed, and it is not easy to say that the Defendant did not make any effort to recover damage to the police officer, and the Defendant appears to have committed any act of interference with the performance of official duties on December 16, 201, the Defendant was sentenced to six months of imprisonment with prison labor for the crime of obstruction of the performance of official duties, etc. On May 4, 2012, and there was no need to punish the Defendant’s remaining crimes of obstruction of the performance of official duties, such as imprisonment with prison labor, and there is no reason to punish the Defendant’s remaining crimes of obstruction of the performance of official duties after the completion of the sentence.

3. Conclusion.