The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is that G’s head part was only one time by setting up against the illegal arrest of the defendant without notifying the police officer of the principle that G, who is a police officer dispatched to the site without notifying the defendant of the principle that G was disturbed, and thus, it constitutes self-defense or legitimate act and thus, the illegality is excluded.

Nevertheless, since the court below found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case, it erred by misapprehending the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. The following facts or circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, namely, ① the Defendant found at the Einsium of D operation in the state of drinking drinking around July 16, 2012 and called “D” due to the police officer G, etc. called “D”, and ② the Defendant asserted that he/she tried to forced a police officer by failing to notify the Sins principle, but at the time of his/her assertion that he/she was going to go to force by forcing the police officer by failing to do so.

In full view of the fact that a police officer, who did not comply with the Gu and took a bath to a police officer at the site, and the police officer stated that the Defendant was unable to wear a lock while speaking before the boarding house (the 60 pages of the trial record); (3) the police officer G consistently stated that he notified the Defendant of the crime at the time of arresting the Defendant, the summary of the crime, the reason for arrest, and the right to appoint a defense counsel, etc. (the 36 pages of the trial record), etc., G police officers may recognize the fact that he lawfully arrests the Defendant in the act of committing an act of robbery, etc., after having notified the Defendant of the doctrine of disturbance and lawfully arrested him.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's assertion on the premise that the arrest of police officers in the act of crime was illegal is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.