The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Fact misunderstanding (as to interference with the performance of official duties), the Defendant did not have a cell phone toward a police officer as stated in the facts charged, but put on the floor to resist excessive response by police officers.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination:

A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts, violence means an act of exercising force against a public official who performs official duties, and the assault includes direct and indirect use of force against a public official (see Supreme Court Decision 81Do326, Mar. 24, 1981). According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, it can be sufficiently recognized that the defendant had a cell phone toward a police officer as stated in the facts charged. The above act by the defendant constitutes an assault in the crime of obstructing the performance of official duties under Article 136 of the Criminal Act. Thus, the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts is without merit.

B. As to the wrongful assertion of sentencing, the crime of this case was committed not only by the Defendant interfered with the hotel business by putting his/her cell phone toward the police officer called out after receiving 112 reports, but also by committing the crime of assault in 2012, by obstructing the performance of official duties, but also by committing the crime of assault in 2014, by obstructing the act of assault in 2014, by interfering with the act of inflicting bodily injury, by obstructing duties, by obstructing property damage, by obstructing the performance of official duties, by obstructing the act of damaging property, by obstructing the act of damaging property, by causing damage to property in 2015, but also by committing the crime of this case again after committing the crime of property damage, by committing the act of damaging property damage, and by committing the act of damaging property damage on December 19, 2014 at Sungnam branch support, which was sentenced to a suspension of the execution of two years as of December 19, 2014.

The defendant's age, sex, environment, and victim as well as the above circumstances.