The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, after assaulting the Victim F, attempted to leave the place in the mind that the Defendant committed an assault against the Defendant, and set up a hand to the police officer, and renounced the Defendant’s escape. However, on the wind that the police officer attempted to pluck up the Defendant’s multi-child hand and pluck up the Defendant, and then, the Defendant did not attempt to go beyond the police officer and walk on the ship.

Therefore, the court below which found the defendant guilty of obstruction of the performance of official duties has erred in mistake.

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

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances revealed in the judgment of the court below and the court of first instance as to the assertion of mistake of facts: (i) the police officer consistently from the investigative agency to the court below, and consistently stated that “I saw the Defendant, she was satisfing the Defendant, she was satisfing the Defendant, she was satisfing the Defendant as she attempted to get on board the ship; and (ii) the witness I also stated that “I am on the ship of the police officer outside the Defendant and satisfing the Defendant’s two arms,” and (iii) the police officer tried to gather soil from the police officer to the side of the bridge, etc. at the time, as well as the parts of the clothes, etc., which the police officer was Ha at the time, and the part on the side of the bridge, etc., which the Defendant did not have complied with the arrest. As such, the Defendant’s assertion that I tried to have been on the ship above the Defendant’s secret.

B. The Defendant, in collaboration with C, inflicted an injury on the victim F, and assaulted the police officer dispatched, on the ground that the Defendant committed the instant crime.