The judgment below

Examining the evidence duly admitted by the first instance court, which maintained the reasoning of the judgment, the court below was just to have found the defendant guilty of obstructing the performance of official duties and refusing to leave from the charges of this case on the grounds stated in its reasoning, and there was no error of law by misapprehending the legal principles as to the objects of the crime of refusing to leave, obstruction of the performance of official duties, and mental and physical disorder

In addition, the argument that the court below's failure to deliberate on the sentencing constitutes an unfair judgment.

According to Article 383 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for not less than ten years is imposed, an appeal shall be allowed on the grounds of unfair sentencing.

In this case where a more minor sentence is imposed against the defendant, the argument that the punishment is too unreasonable is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.