2. It is true that the defendant had no record of punishment due to the same criminal conduct, and that the defendant had an attitude to reflect his/her criminal conduct when he/she was in the trial. However, in light of the situation where a viewing officer was unable to perform his/her official duties on the ground that the viewing officer was unable to respond to the defendant's civil petition, it is a case where the viewing officer was unable to perform his/her official duties on the ground that he/she was unable to respond to the defendant's civil petition, and in light of the circumstances of the crime and its contents, it is judged that the defendant's criminal liability is not easy. Furthermore, if the defendant filed a civil petition with a long-term viewing officer, etc. to the effect that he/she was the legitimate exercise of his/her right, and if he/she did not respond to it, it seems that the defendant interferes with the legitimate performance of official duties of the viewing officer, etc. for a long time, the court below's punishment is too inappropriate, and the above defendant's assertion is not accepted.

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