2. The lower court determined that the Defendant’s punishment against the Defendant was imposed three years, considering the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive and background of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc., as a favorable condition to the Defendant, taking into account the following factors: (a) the Defendant recognized each of the crimes in this case; (b) the Defendant committed an injury to the police officer who suffered damage; (c) the Defendant interfered with the lawful performance of duties by the police officer; (d) the Defendant destroyed the patrol car and the restaurant in the process; and (e) the Defendant inflicted an injury on another person while escaping; (d) additional traffic accidents occurred during the course of escape; and (e) the Defendant has already had a large number of criminal records at the trial.

In full view of the conditions of sentencing and the recommended sentencing guidelines set forth in the sentencing review process of the lower court, the lower court did not evaluate that the lower court’s determination exceeded the reasonable bounds of its discretion, and there is no change in the conditions of sentencing that can be deemed unfair to maintain the lower court’s determination.

(A) The Defendant attempted to pay KRW 3 million to K by means of a postal money order to the police officer who sustained an injury due to special obstruction of performance of official duties in the trial, but the said police officer refused to receive a postal money order, and no other circumstance exists that the said police officer’s damage was recovered or the agreement was reached. Therefore, it cannot be deemed that the sentence of the lower court is too unreasonable.

Defendant’s assertion is not accepted.

3. As such, the defendant's appeal is without merit and Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act is not reasonable.