The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant misjudgments the facts (as to interference with the performance of official duties) that the Defendant abused the above police officers in order to help the police officers know that the police officers were the police officers, and thus, there was no intention to interfere with the performance of official duties.

The judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

(b) Sentencing (the sentence of the lower court: One year of imprisonment);

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, such as G, H’s statement protocol of police, and black videos, as to the Defendant’s assertion of fact-misunderstanding, namely, ① the victimized police officer G and H, at the time of the Defendant’s crime of this case, appears to have been able to see the Defendant’s lock in the situation where the Defendant was faced with a guard, and the E, subject to arrest. ② the above police officer appears to have known that the police officer was a police officer, stating that he was a police officer, while stating that he was a police officer, and ③ the arrested police officer was in the process of performing official duties.

E and the defendant are both illegal aliens in China and have known from China that they were illegally staying in China. If the defendant was aware that they were illegal staying in China, and if the defendant was aware that they were arrested, the police officer would have been aware that they were in the course of performing official duties, considering the fact that the defendant could sufficiently recognize the fact that the victimized police officer knew that they were performing official duties, and that the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of the warrant of arrest by the victimized police officer, and there was no error of misunderstanding the facts as alleged by the defendant.

Defendant

The argument is without merit.

B. The lower court’s judgment on the wrongful assertion of sentencing is that police officers did not arrest E due to the Defendant’s interference with the performance of official duties, the degree of assault inflicted by the Defendant is not less than four years, and that the Defendant exceeded four years.