2. It is recognized that the Defendant recognized the instant crime and against the mistake, and that the damaged object of larceny was temporarily returned to the victim.

However, the crime of this case was committed with only one cell phone of the victim I, who stolen the victim I, injured the victim D, and also inflicted an injury on the police officer called out. Since the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties is a crime that undermines the function of the State by nullifying the legitimate exercise of public authority, it is necessary to strictize the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties. The defendant was sentenced to two years of suspended execution and probation in August 7, 2014 due to the crime of obstruction of official duties, etc. on January 15, 2014, which became final and conclusive on January 15, 2014, which committed the crime of this case in this case, even if he had been under suspended execution, and there was several records of punishment for the same kind of crime in the past. In addition, the court below's decision is unreasonable in light of the following circumstances: the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, motive and circumstance, motive, method and circumstances that may be newly considered in sentencing after the sentence of the court below.

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.