The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the evidence duly admitted, the lower court is justifiable to have found the Defendant guilty of obstructing the performance of official duties among the facts charged in the instant case on the grounds stated in its reasoning, and there is no violation of law by exceeding the bounds of free evaluation of evidence, as alleged in the grounds of appeal.

Meanwhile, according to the records, the defendant asserted the mistake and mental or physical disorder as to insult of the facts charged in the instant case among the facts charged in the appellate brief, and at the first trial date of the lower court, he stated the reasons for appeal and did not clearly withdraw the allegation.

Nevertheless, the lower court rejected the Defendant’s appeal on the ground that the Defendant’s ground for appeal was based on the mistake of facts as to interference with the performance of official duties and the allegation of sentencing, and dismissed the Defendant’s appeal without determining the mistake of facts as to insult and the allegation of mental or physical disorder.

However, examining the evidence duly adopted in light of the record, it is acceptable to find the Defendant guilty of insult among the facts charged in the instant case, and it can be known that the Defendant did not have any mental or physical weakness or loss due to the principal action at the time of each of the instant crimes, and there is no violation of law as alleged in the grounds of appeal.

Although the lower court erred by omitting the judgment on this point, it does not affect the conclusion of the judgment.

In addition, the argument that the judgment of the court below contains an error of law in misunderstanding the legal principles on sentencing is ultimately an unfair argument for sentencing. According to Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, an appeal on the ground of an unfair sentencing is permitted only in the case where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for not less than ten

In this case where a more minor punishment is imposed against the defendant, the argument that the amount of punishment is unfair is not a legitimate ground for appeal.