2. It is recognized that the circumstances such as the confession of all the crimes of this case and the violation of his depth of his mistake are recognized, and the victims of the damage to the property of this case do not want punishment against the defendant.

However, the crime of this case interferes with the business of the victim B by force of the defendant, damages the victim E and F cars, and at the same time interferes with legitimate execution of duties concerning the prevention of the crime by the above police officers, in light of the method and contents of the crime, etc., the crime of this case is committed at the same time despite the fact that there is a very poor nature of the crime in light of the crime, the crime of this case was committed in spite of the fact that there is no special circumstance or change of circumstances that may be newly considered after the sentence of the judgment below, and other various sentencing conditions presented during the argument of this case, such as equity in sentencing with the same and similar incidents, the defendant's age, sexual behavior, environment, motive and circumstance after the crime, etc., and the sentence imposed by the court below is in conflict between the crime of obstructing the execution of official duties and the injury to the victim slope H by being called upon upon receiving a report. However, the sentencing guidelines in principle is deemed to constitute a violation of the general sentencing guidelines in the scope of punishment among the above crimes, and the scope of the harm to the remaining crimes within six months of general sentencing guidelines.