The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) of the lower court’s punishment against the Defendant (the imprisonment of six months, the suspension of execution of two years, the observation of protection, and the community service order 120 hours) is too unreasonable.

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). In light of the foregoing legal doctrine, there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the lower court on the grounds that new materials on sentencing have not been submitted to the Defendant in the trial, and there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the lower court, and even considering various factors, including various circumstances considered in the sentencing, the lower court’s sentencing exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

It does not seem to be too unreasonable.

In particular, the crime of this case is more so in light of the fact that the strict legal order is established and the serious punishment is required to eradicate the light of public authority, and the degree of violence against the victimized police officers is not somewhat weak.

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 on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.