The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the reasons for appeal (4 months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Under our criminal litigation law, which takes the principle of court-oriented trials and the principle of direct determination, there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and where the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect the determination of sentencing (Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). Although the Defendant appears to have committed the instant crime, the court below appears to have determined the punishment against the Defendant in light of the aforementioned circumstances, and there is no change of circumstances that may be considered in sentencing after the sentence, and the Defendant committed the instant crime on October 20, 2016 after being sentenced two years of suspension of execution on the grounds of interference with the performance of official duties, and even before the judgment became final and conclusive on October 28, 2016, the Defendant did not appear to have been subject to reasonable punishment, such as the records of violation of the Road Traffic Act (hereinafter referred to as “Road Traffic Act”) and the motive and circumstances leading up to the instant crime, etc.

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.