2. The fact that the Defendant recognized all of the crimes of this case is favorable to the Defendant.

However, in light of the above favorable circumstances, the court below is deemed to have already determined the punishment by reflecting the above favorable circumstances, and in the case of special obstruction of performance of official duties, even if there were two times the past records of punishment for the crime of obstruction of official duties, the defendant's age, family relation, criminal records, character and conduct, environment, means and method of the crime, motive and circumstance of the crime, etc., and the sentencing guidelines of the Supreme Court and the sentencing guidelines of this case should be too unfair, considering the following factors: (a) the crime of obstruction of business is limited to eight minutes of the time of the crime; (b) the time of the crime of obstruction of business is limited to eight minutes of the crime; (c) the victims' damage has not been completely recovered; and (d) the defendant's legal attitude has already been expressed against the defendant, and the defendant's age, family relation, criminal records, personality and behavior, environment, method and method of the crime, motive and circumstance after the crime of this case, etc.

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.