The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant of mistake of facts is merely divingd at the main points operated by the victim (hereinafter “the main points of this case”) without leaving any scam on the day of this case, and there is no disturbance that obstructs the business of the victim by avoiding disturbance, and therefore, the police officer’s act of arresting himself does not constitute lawful performance of official duties.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant of unreasonable sentencing (two months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, and eight hours of social service) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1 The judgment of the court below on the assertion of mistake of facts is acknowledged based on the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, i.e., ① at the time of the police statement, the victim made a statement that "the victim made a threat that he would cause him to go to the defendant who was a son, made a desire to go to the police, and refused to leave." The defendant stated that "the defendant did not comply with the request of the police officer to leave, took a bath, and opened the police officer's right-hand arms." The court of the court of the court below stated that "the defendant tried to go to go to the police for more than 2 hours, and even after playing, the defendant did not want to go to do so at that time, but the defendant did not return to the police officer when he did not want to go to go to the 40 minutes of drinking," and that "the defendant did not wish to go to go to the police officer before 14.12.28.14.14."

“A relatively consistent and specific statement is made with respect to the instant crime,” and ② in the lower court’s trial, the police officer H stands in the Defendant’s business.