All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. The court below's scope of trial in this Court's judgment is dismissed as to the assault committed by the victim C, D, and E among the facts charged in this case, and the remaining facts charged were convicted, and since the appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor was filed only for the guilty part and the dismissal part of each of the above prosecution which was not appealed by the defendant and the prosecutor was finalized, the scope of trial in this

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence of the lower court (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court is too unhued and unreasonable.

3. We also examine the judgment and prosecutor’s improper claims for sentencing.

The fact that all of the crimes of this case are recognized by the defendant and against himself, and that the defendant deposited KRW 500,000 with the J of the damaged police officer as the person who was the person who was the person who committed the crime, is more favorable.

On the other hand, without any reason, each of the crimes of this case by the defendant committed the crime of this case against the victim H by taking the victim's own desire and walking three times in the line of the victim H, and assaulting the victim by taking the victim's desire in the process of committing the crime of assault into the detention room. In the process of committing the crime of assault, it is very poor that the crime was committed by dividing the part of the human body of the J with his finger and obstructing the legitimate execution of his duties, and was not used from the victim H, and the damage was not recovered, and the records of punishment for the same kind of crime are included in one sentence.

In addition, in full view of all the conditions of sentencing as shown in the records and arguments of this case, including the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, health condition, circumstances after the commission of the crime, etc., the sentence imposed by the lower court was proper and the lower court’s judgment of sentencing exceeded the reasonable bounds of discretion.

There are no circumstances such as evaluation or maintenance of it is deemed unfair.

Therefore, the defendant asserts the sentence sentenced by the court below.