2. In the judgment, the Defendant was punished more than 20 times for violent crimes, and was sentenced to imprisonment more than five times, and committed another crime during the period of repeated crime for the same kind of crime.

Moreover, the Defendant had been sentenced to a fine due to interference with the business affairs in 2015 during the period of repeated crime, and the Defendant again committed the instant crime. Therefore, the Defendant seems to have committed violent crimes repeatedly.

In the police station, the defendant is not guilty of committing the crime by avoiding disturbance, such as abusive, and injuring the police officer for about one hour.

Therefore, the sentence of sentence against the defendant is inevitable.

B. When considering the fact that the defendant was unable to agree with the victim, various circumstances that are conditions for sentencing, such as the age, sex, environment, and circumstances after the crime, and other circumstances that are conditions for sentencing, and the highest sentence of the recommended sentencing guidelines applicable to the obstruction of business, which are part of the crime of this case, are one year (aggravating the category 1 (Interference with Business) and one year (aggravating the category 1 (Interference with Business)), the lower court’s sentence is too large and thus, it is not recognized that the sentence of the lower court should be reversed.

Therefore, the defendant's appeal is without merit.

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