The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although the Defendant made a misunderstanding of facts to a police officer, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence of ten-month imprisonment imposed by the court below on the defendant is too unreasonable.

2. In full view of the evidence duly admitted and duly admitted, the lower court recognized the fact that the Defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of the police officer by assaulting the police officer, such as spiting spits on face, drinking spits, drinking spits on a bridge twice on a bridge, etc. at the time and place specified in the facts charged of the instant case, by taking into account the evidence.

Examining the above judgment of the court below with the evidence duly examined and adopted by the court below, the above judgment is just and acceptable. Thus, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

3. It is recognized that the instant crime of this case on the assertion of unfair sentencing was committed by the Defendant under the influence of alcohol, and that the degree of damage by police officers does not seem to be significant, and that it is a situation in which the remaining term of punishment after the parole is invalidated due to the instant crime is to be imposed.

However, the crime of this case is a spit of spits, spits, spits, spits, etc. on face with drinking and bridge while taking a bath to a police officer who was under the influence of alcohol, and the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties in order to protect the legitimate performance of official duties of the State and to establish sound social order. In particular, the defendant was released from parole while being sentenced to imprisonment for life for murder and special robbery in 1976.