2. The lower court dismissed the prosecution regarding intimidation against the Defendant among the facts charged, and convicted the Defendant of the remainder of the facts charged.

As to this, only the Defendant appealed against the guilty portion of the judgment below, the dismissal of the above indictment was separated and finalized as it is.

Therefore, the dismissal of the above public prosecution is excluded from the scope of this Court.

3. The circumstances favorable to the defendant are that the defendant's judgment on the grounds for appeal of this case was made more time in the trial, and all of the crimes of this case are recognized and reflected, and that the victim B does not want the punishment of the defendant.

However, the fact that the defendant has already been punished for the same kind of crime, the crime of obstruction of the performance of official duties of this case requires strict legal order and requires strict punishment to eradicate a light of the public authority, the crime of special intimidation of this case and special property damage of this case is not suitable in light of the risk of the crime, and the defendant did not receive a letter from the victim of the crime of obstruction of the performance of official duties of this case or have no smooth agreement with the victim until now, and the defendant's age, character and conduct, including various circumstances considered in the sentencing of the court below, do not seem to be too difficult to the extent that the sentencing of the court below exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion, even if taking into account the various factors of sentencing as shown in the argument of this case including the defendant's age, character and conduct.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

4. 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.