2. The judgment appears to be contrary to the Defendant’s mistake, and in the case of the 2015 Highest 6501 case, it is recognized that the Defendant was an contingent crime that occurred under the interest of the Defendant under the influence of alcohol.

However, in order to eliminate the awareness of the legitimate public authority and to establish a legal order, there is a need for a severe punishment with regard to the crime obstructing the performance of official duties, such as the instant case, and the Defendant has the history of criminal punishment for violent crimes; each of the instant crimes is a crime punishable during the period of repeated crimes; the Defendant did not agree with the victims; the Defendant did not make any effort to recover from damage; there is no special circumstance or change in circumstances that may be newly considered in the sentencing after the pronouncement of the lower judgment; and other matters concerning the sentencing as indicated in the Defendant’s age, sexual behavior, environment, background and motive leading to the instant crime, and other records and changes in the legal order, the Defendant’s assertion does not seem to be unfair because the sentence of the lower judgment is too excessive, and thus, is not reasonable.

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.