The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant did not commit a crime interfering with the performance of official duties, on the grounds that he did not depict police officers G at the time of the instant case, or spabbbling.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court (eight months of imprisonment and two years of suspended sentence) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts, the following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court based on the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court, namely, ① Police Officer G and the co-defendant A of the lower court stated to the effect that the Defendant had consistently livedd with G by the investigative agency from the investigation agency to the lower court’s court, and the police officer H called with G was also a police officer in the lower court’s court court’s court that the Defendant had engaged in

A statement, <2> A was found in the site of this case, which was separated from the upper half of the G's uniforms, and G was in a situation in which it was impossible for A to attack his own name because he saw A's arms at the time of the suppression of A and carried out vagabonds.

As the Defendant made a statement, he appears to have been added to G as seen above in the process of cutting off the bridge of G, and ③ G and A, at the time of the instant case, the Defendant’s excessive suppression, making a flapsing of G while resisting that G had flapsed into excessive suppression.

The defendant's friendship I stated that the defendant did not have a flabbbial of G.

Although making statements, it was argued that the defendant resisted that it is not excessive suppression against G.

(4) The Defendant denied the instant crime at the time when he was first examined by the police, and subsequently saw that he had flabage in G.

The Defendant appears to have made a statement to be true in light of the background leading up to the Defendant’s confession made by the prosecution, and the motive leading up to the flapsing of G, etc., and the Defendant appears to have made a true statement at the prosecution.