All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for four months and 1.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Despite the fact that the Defendant committed an obstruction of performance of official duties, a deadly weapon, a crime of personal injury, a crime of obstruction of business, a crime of obstruction of business, a crime of destruction of property on July 3, 2013, and a thief crime in the judgment of the court below, the court below convicted all of the charges. The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles, or by misapprehending the legal principles, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The punishment of imprisonment for two years and six months imposed by the court below on the defendant, and the punishment of imprisonment for two months imposed by the court below on the defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant ex officio, the case of this court 2014No159, which is the case of appeal against the judgment of the court of first instance, and the case of this court 2014No902, which is the case of appeal against the judgment of the court of second instance, was consolidated in the oral proceedings of the oral proceedings. The remainder of the crime except for the crime No. 1 of the judgment of the court of first instance and the crime of the judgment of the court of second instance are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and shall be sentenced to a single sentence within the extent that aggravating concurrent crimes pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. Thus, the judgment of the court below, including the part

3. The defendant's assertion of misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles is still subject to the judgment of this court, even though there is a ground for ex officio reversal of facts or misapprehension of legal principles as above.

According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court and the trial court, the Defendant committed an assault and interfered with the correctional officer’s performance of duties by assaulting the correctional officer C at around 10:15, Feb. 17, 2012 at the Busan Detention House’s Disciplinary Zone 1 room, etc., and ② around 03:40, Jul. 3, 2013, the said victim owned by the said victim, who was parked in front of the “F” main point operated by the victim E.