All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant (1) misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles do not spit the victim’s desire to the victim’s prison officer on the day of the instant case. Even if the Defendant did not do so by domestic affairs, the Defendant first took a serious bath and took a bath in response thereto. As such, the Defendant does not constitute the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties and the crime of insult.

(2) The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below as to the defendant's assertion of mistake, namely, the victim's prison officer D and the victim's prison officer E, G were spited with a strong desire and aggression toward the victim's prison officer first from the investigation agency to the court below, and the victim's prison officer first stated that the victim's prison officer did not have any desire to commit a crime. The victim's CCTV images recorded in the form of the victim's prison officer at the time of the instant case did not appear to have a behavior to escape the defendant. The victim's prison officer in the CCTV images recorded in the form of the victim's prison officer at the time of the instant case also did not appear to have an action to escape the defendant, each of the instant facts charged in this case is sufficiently recognized, and the victim'

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of mistake and misapprehension of legal principles is without merit.

B. In the past, the Defendant had a record of having been punished several times for the same or similar crimes, the Defendant committed the instant crime during the period of repeated crime of the same or similar crimes, and the Defendant committed an act of continuous violation in the prison, and thus, the nature of the Defendant and the criminal intent are not good.

However, the damage of the victim is often caused by the prison officer.