The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts 1) The Defendant did not inflict an injury on the victim as stated in the judgment of the court below. 2) The Defendant did not interfere with the execution of official duties by assaulting a police officer as stated in the judgment of the court below, and even if there was such a fact, it is merely a passive resistance against the execution of official duties.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (three million won by fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) Determination of misunderstanding of facts in the judgment of the court below, which is recognized by comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, i.e., the following circumstances: ① at the time of the investigation agency to the court below before the court below's trial, the defendant franchising expenses to the victim and gathering water cups, etc. due to Kimchi's cold storage problems (19 pages, 44 pages, and 51 pages of the investigation records); ② After consultation with the victim, the victim received hospital treatment at the time of consultation with his neighbors; ③ the defendant also stated that the victim did not memory at the time of the investigation agency, but he stated to the effect that he did not have an accurate date but had an armed franchiscing problem with the victim at the time of the investigation agency (71 pages of the investigation record); thus, the above argument by the defendant is rejected; ② the defendant was lawfully admitted from 201D to the investigation agency; and ② the defendant was lawfully admitted from 2015.