The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and the evidence duly admitted, the lower court is justifiable to have found the Defendant guilty of all interference with duties, intimidation, and obstruction of performance of official duties on March 4, 2018, and March 19, 2018 among the facts charged in the instant case on the grounds stated in its reasoning. In so determining, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine on obstruction of performance of official duties by misapprehending the bounds of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on obstruction of performance of duties, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal.

In addition, according to Article 383 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment or imprisonment without prison labor for not less than ten years is imposed, a final 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.