The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The gist of the grounds of appeal is that the judgment of the court below which convicted the defendant, although the defendant did not interfere with the execution of his duties by cutting the H's arms, who is a police officer, is erroneous in misconception of facts.

2. The judgment of the court below is based on the evidence duly adopted and examined, i.e., the following circumstances acknowledged by the court below, i.e., ① the Ha and the police officer called to the scene after receiving a report on the fighting at the distance of E on the date and time stated in the indictment: (a) the Ha and the police officer present at the court of the court below in the process of arresting E as a flagrant offender committing the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties; and (b) the Defendant stated that the police officer asked for the “dlebing” the police officer to arrest E; and (c) the prosecutor asked for the prosecutor’s question, “When this case was put to the police officer, the Defendant was fighting at the bar,” to the extent that he would interfere with other police officers’ execution of duties, and that the Defendant’s physical contact with the police officer of this case was sufficiently acknowledged by fully considering the following facts: (a) the Defendant’s physical contact with the police officer of this case.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal by the defendant is groundless. It is so decided as per

The defendant's defense counsel claimed a mistake of facts on the date of the first trial and maintained the same argument on the date of the second trial which has concluded the pleadings, and on December 11, 2014, after the pleadings have been concluded.