The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The crime of violence cannot be prosecuted against the victim's express intent under Article 260 (3) of the Criminal Act. As to the remaining violence among the facts charged in the instant case, the judgment dismissing the public prosecution should be rendered on December 17, 2018, since the victim B, who submitted an application for no punishment against the defendant on which he/she would be punished, the judgment dismissing the public prosecution. However, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts or misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment. 2) As to each of the facts charged in the instant case and attempted assault against the victim B, the defendant and the victim were in the relation of lineal blood relative relationship with the victim B, and thus, the judgment of exemption from punishment should be rendered pursuant to Articles 354 and 328 (1) of the Criminal Act, which affected the conclusion of the judgment, and the judgment of conviction against the victim C by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment, or by misapprehending the legal principles as to the victim C's attempted accusation under Article 281 (2) of the Criminal Act.

3. Regarding the obstruction of special performance of official duties, the Defendant possessed a bags containing excessive food blade at the time of visiting the F viewing Counseling Center on March 16, 2018, and sent the above knife to eating by reducing the excessive knife. Therefore, there is no fact that the Defendant carried the knife, which is a dangerous object, and threatened public officials.