The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal did not contain an assault against a police officer, and even if police officers did not notify the Mono Principles while arresting the defendant, the court below convicted the defendant by misunderstanding the facts, and sentenced him/her guilty.

2. The judgment of the court below, based on the evidence duly adopted and examined, found the following facts, namely, the police officers who received a report that the defendant was suffering from disturbance, such as resisting the library at large interest, did not refuse to comply with the request for a presentation of identification and identification card. The police officers notified that the defendant did not appear in the library, arrested the defendant for business obstruction suspicion, and refused to affix a seal with the statement of the arrest of the flagrant offender at the request of the defendant to indicate the arrest of the defendant and to affix a seal on the confirmation document. During this process, the defendant was sleeping the police officer E's flick, booming the defendant's chest, booming the defendant's chest, booming the police officer's chest in order to spread the police officer F who arrested the defendant, and did not accept the principle that the police officers arrested the defendant, as well as the defendant arrested the flagrant offender, and thus, did not accept the defendant's assertion that the police officers did not arrest the defendant.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.