The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, like the charge of mistake of facts, did not commit assaulting the police officer’s head debt by scambling it with scambling.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. We examine the argument of mistake of facts. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below: ① the victimized police officer E opened a patrol room to have the Defendant take a bath to himself/herself, and consistently stated his/her head debt twice in a very concrete and consistent manner, and the circumstances leading to the Defendant’s false statement to injure himself/herself, or the Defendant did not assault himself/herself, are not found to have any circumstance leading to arresting the flagrant offender even though he/she did not do so falsely; ② the Defendant also led to the confession of the facts charged in this case by obtaining counsel’s assistance at the court of the court of the court below; ③ The Defendant could not be easily rejected unless the Defendant did not have any explanation to understand the background leading up to the reversal of the above confession at the court of the court; ③ The Defendant appears to have taken a very serious bath while booming the Defendant’s head debt at the time of the instant case, and the police officer’s body was a threat to the police officer’s bodily harm after 7th of his/her body (see, e.g., the police officer’s body evidence attached to the Defendant 7).