2. We examine the judgment, the fact that the defendant recognized the crime of this case and reflected it, the elderly, and the degree of obstruction of performance of official duties is not much severe, and the police officers do not want the punishment against the defendant is favorable to the defendant.

However, there is a need to strictly punish the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties for the establishment of public authority and the protection of legal order; the defendant committed the crime of obstruction of official duties and damage to public goods during the period of repeated crime resulting from obstruction of business even though he was first punished by a fine; the defendant committed the crime of this case during the period of repeated crime; the defendant has a number of force to punish the crime of obstruction of official duties, other than the punishment power, in addition to the above punishment power, which is disadvantageous to the defendant; and the defendant has no particular change in the sentencing conditions compared with the court below; and in full view of various sentencing conditions specified in the argument of this case, it cannot be deemed that the sentence of the court below is too unreasonable

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.