The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles 1) The Defendant committed a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (Habitual special assault) (Aggravated special assault) with a cafeteria, but the Defendant did not take a part of the victim’s left shoulder on the cafeteria.

Nevertheless, the court below found the defendant guilty, and there is a violation of law by mistake of facts.

2) The Defendant did not intentionally assault the police officer to obstruct the performance of official duties, and somewhat his body fighting was conducted in the process of illegal coercion in the N community service center and resistance to the illegal arrest in the OB district. Therefore, it constitutes a legitimate defense.

Nevertheless, the court below found the defendant guilty of interfering with the performance of official duties, which is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts and legal principles.

B. The sentence of the lower court (one year and six months of imprisonment, fine of 300,000 won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

가. 사실 오인 및 법리 오해 주장에 관한 판단 1) 폭력행위 등 처벌에 관한 법률위반( 상습 특수 폭행) 의 점에 관한 판단 원심이 적법하게 채택하여 조사한 피해자 E의 수사기관 및 원심 법정에서의 진술은 피고인이 가위의 날 부분으로 위 피해자의 왼쪽 어깨부분을 내리찍었고, 당시 두꺼운 점퍼를 입고 있어 점퍼가 찢어지지 않았고, 몸에도 큰 상처는 나지 않았으며, 다만 피부가 빨갛게 변했다는 것으로, 그 진술이 일관되고 달리 허위로 진술할 동기나 이유를 찾을 수 없다.

In addition, one witness R has made a statement that the police and the court of the court of the court of the trial have taken the family rank as an intermediate force and is consistent with the statement of the victim.

immediately after the case, the image of the photograph taken of the shoulder part of the victim is also appropriate for the statements of the victim and R.

In light of the size and degree of force marked on one side, and the location of the ploser, etc., it is only the fact that the ploser did not tear.