2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). In full view of the reasons for sentencing revealed in the pleadings of the instant case, including (a) the following: (b) the Defendant did not submit new data on sentencing based on the foregoing legal doctrine; (c) did not change the sentencing conditions compared with the lower court’s failure to do so; and (d) the Defendant went to commit the instant crime without being aware of the fact that the Defendant is serving a repeated offense as a single offense; and (c) the act of obstructing performance of duties of police officials performing legitimate duties is repeated, the lower court’s sentencing is too large and does not seem to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

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