2. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, i.e., the victim D and G investigative agency, which correspond to the facts of the instant construction work, are considerably reliable since each statement made by the victim D and G investigative agency is considerably specific in relation to the circumstances of the Defendant’s crime and its contents, the situation after the commission of each of the instant crimes; ② the Defendant continued to arrest the police officer in a flagrant act despite the legitimate restraint of the police officer dispatched after receiving a report after each of the instant crimes; ③ the victims were taken out from the land owned by the Defendant, but the Defendant did not submit any materials to acknowledge it up to the trial, as stated in the judgment of the court below, it can be sufficiently recognized that the Defendant interfered with the victims’ soil transport and construction work. Thus, the court below did not err by misapprehending the facts pointed out by the Defendant, which affected the conclusion of the judgment

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

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.