The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Error of facts: (a) The Defendant did not deception C or receive money and other valuables from C and did not deal with legal affairs; (b) merely, without any condition, C gave 2 million won to the Defendant with an indication of macium in respect of receiving assistance from the criminal investigation council; (c) there was no injury in the course of C; and (c) there was no assault by correctional officers F and G.

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

B. Although it is recognized that the defendant assaulted a correctional officer, even if the punishment is finalized by the person in charge, the defendant was unable to receive a notice from the person in charge and make it difficult to obtain the notification to prepare for the "brut" moving the prisoner to a ward, but the prison officer refused the request and forced the request, which is not a legitimate execution of public duties, and thus, the defendant's refusal of the request does not constitute obstruction of the performance of official duties.

Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of the instant case. In so determining, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on “justifiable performance of official duties” in the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties

C. Ten months of imprisonment with prison labor for the crimes of Articles 1 and 2 of the decision of the court below on unfair sentencing, and seven months of imprisonment with prison labor for the crimes of No. 3 of the decision of the court below are too unreasonable.

Other