The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is only resistance against the illegal performance of official duties, and there was no intention to assault the police officer.

2. According to evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the court below and the court below: (a) the defendant 112 reported 112 persons who want to walk to convenience points while under the influence of alcohol; (b) the police officers F, etc. who called upon upon receiving a report arrived at the convenience points to confirm the details of the report from the point of view; and (c) the defendant failed to confirm the circumstances of the case to go home to the defendant; (d) the defendant expressed complaints to the police officers on the ground that he did not confirm the situation of the case; (e) the defendant go out of convenience points at the police officers' request; (e) the defendant continued to go outside of convenience points; (e) the police officers may be punished as an insulting crime; and (g) the defendant asked the police officers to ask for personal information to the effect that he tried to do so by drinking, and (e) the police officers attempted to interfere with the defendant's arrest of a flagrant offender under the suspicion of obstruction of performance of official duties; and (e) the police officers' attempt to commit an unlawful act such as assault or patrol by the defendant.

3. Conclusion.