All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal that the court below sentenced the Defendants to each punishment (Defendant A: 6 months of imprisonment, Defendant B: imprisonment with prison labor for 4 months of suspended execution, 2 years of suspended execution, observation of protection, community service 40 hours, and 40 hours of violent therapy lectures) is too unreasonable.

2. The Defendants showed an attitude against the Defendants to recognize all of the instant crimes, and the degree of injury suffered by the victims E is relatively minor, and the police officers did not suffer much damage due to the lack of the degree of assault against the police officers, etc., which are favorable to the Defendants.

However, the crime of this case committed by the Defendants was committed by assaulting victims E at the end of the time when the Defendants were dead, and the Defendant A interfered with the performance of duties by assaulting the police officers dispatched to the site due to the above assault case, damaged public goods by causing the external radiation reduction devices installed in the earth, and the nature of the crime is not good in light of the content, method, and circumstances of the crime, the Defendants failed to agree with the victim E, and the damage has not yet been recovered, and the Defendants had been punished several times of violent crimes, and the lower court appears to have determined the punishment within the scope of the recommended punishment set by the sentencing guidelines, taking into account the various circumstances of the Defendants, such as the fact that there is no special change of circumstances that could reduce the sentence of the lower court, and other unfavorable circumstances, such as the Defendants’ age, sexual behavior, environment, method, circumstance, circumstance of the crime, circumstance after the crime, and the changes in the records and the sentencing theory expressed in the above case, it cannot be deemed that the lower court’s punishment is improper and unfair.

Therefore, the Defendants’ assertion is without merit.

3. As such, the Defendants’ appeal is without merit, and all of the appeals are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.