The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In light of the following circumstances, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts and finding the Defendant guilty.

Defendant F. The Defendant’s “drawers to cut” to police officers F.

Although there is a stated statement as "," there is no fact of assaulting F as stated in the facts charged.

In light of the fact that the Defendant and F have seen the face of dispute between the middle and CCTV, there is no CCTV video to support the facts charged, etc., evidence to acknowledge the facts charged of this case is insufficient.

The Defendant purchased the instant World Cup at the convenience store and drinked the instant alcoholic beverage in a mixed manner outside the convenience store. However, F is believed only by the employees of the convenience store, and the Defendant attempted to issue a penalty payment notice on the premise that the Defendant would avoid a disturbance of drinking, and F’s behavior cannot be said to be a legitimate performance of official duties.

At the time, the place where this case was punished is back to the wind market, and the place where the charge was generated differently from the fact.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (one hundred months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. According to the G court's statement in the purport that ① the evidence duly adopted and examined, in particular, the defendant was sent to the site of this case after receiving the report of 112 and had a direct conversation with the defendant, and the defendant was tried to report the defendant's speech and response, and during that process, the police officer F's statement in the court of the original instance, and the convenience store, reported the defendant's behavior, reported the defendant's behavior, and responded the defendant to the police officer's assault, the court below acknowledged the fact that the defendant abused the police officer F as stated in the facts charged, and ② within the convenience store of the defendant, which can be known by the evidence.