The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the evidence duly admitted by the court below, the court below was just in finding the defendant guilty of obstruction of performance of official duties among the facts charged in this case on the grounds as stated in its reasoning, and there were no errors by misapprehending the legal principles on self-defense, contrary to

In addition, the argument that the judgment of the court below erred in violation of Article 51 of the Criminal Act by significantly deviating from the discretionary power of sentencing constitutes an unreasonable sentencing argument.

However, under Article 383 subparagraph 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 has been imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed. Thus, in this case where a more minor sentence has been imposed on the defendant, the argument that the sentencing of the punishment

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.