The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence of the lower court (one-year imprisonment) is too unreasonable as to the gist of the grounds for appeal.

2. The fact that the defendant agreed smoothly with the victim D is the circumstance favorable to the defendant that the defendant recognized the defendant's mistake as a whole and reflected against the defendant.

However, the defendant has already been punished for the same kind of crime several times, and without being aware of the fact that he was in the same kind of crime, he was in the crime of this case, and other various circumstances shown in the arguments of this case, such as the defendant's age, sex, environment, motive and consequence of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, and the scope of the recommended punishment according to the sentencing guidelines (from June to June 10).

(a) Class 1 Crimes (Obstruction of Execution of Official Duties) (Scope of Recommendation) (Obstruction of Execution of Official Duties). Basic area (Obstruction of Execution of Official Duties from June to June);

(b) Two crimes (Interference with business) (Scope of recommended punishment). The basic area (Interference with business) shall be the 1 type (Interference with business).

(c) Type 3 (Assaults) (Scope of recommending punishment) and the basic area (two months to ten months) of the crimes of assault;

D. Scope of the recommended punishment according to the standards for handling multiple crimes: The Defendant’s assertion is not acceptable, since the lower court’s punishment is too large and is not deemed to be unfair in light of the two-months of imprisonment to June 10.

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