The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged on the grounds indicated in its reasoning.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the establishment of general traffic obstruction, without exhaust all necessary deliberations.

Although the Defendant asserts to the effect that the instant act did not constitute a crime, and that there was a justifiable ground for misunderstanding, it does not constitute a legitimate ground for appeal, since the Defendant’s ground for appeal or the lower court’s decision did not appear to be subject to a judgment ex officio.

Furthermore, even in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine on statutory errors in its judgment.

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