The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Fact mistake: The defendant committed a crime against the defendant in order to meet I, and the police officer was suitable, and the defendant did not have any intention to interfere with the execution of official duties.

B. Illegal sentencing: The sentence of the lower court (eight months of imprisonment, two years of suspended sentence, and one hundred and sixty hours of community service order) is too unreasonable.

2. The court below rejected the Defendant’s assertion of misunderstanding of facts by asserting the same as the grounds for appeal in this case at the court below’s ruling. The court below rejected the Defendant’s assertion of misunderstanding of facts. The court below rejected the Defendant’s assertion of misunderstanding of facts. The court below affirmed the following circumstances acknowledged by evidence: ① The Defendant and I investigated CCTV images submitted as evidence; the Defendant and I did not dispute at a place where CCTV was not taken; while the Defendant and I did not take the CCTV, the Defendant and I were in a position where the police officer did not take the CCTV; while the crime of this case was committed at a place where the CCTV was not taken, the Defendant and I were in a position where the police officer controlled the Defendant; and the police officer did not check the contents of the statement by the victimized police officer; ② the Defendant cannot be deemed to have credibility in the statement by the damaged police officer on the ground that the Defendant could not check the contents of the statement by video, and ② the Defendant’s assertion that there was no error in law as seen above at the time of leaving the Defendant’s visit and the police officer.

3. The fact that the defendant's failure to perform his/her official duties is minor and that the defendant has no record of criminal punishment.