The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the evidence duly admitted, the lower court is justifiable to have found the Defendant guilty of obstruction of the performance of special duties among the facts charged in the instant case on the grounds indicated in its reasoning.

In so doing, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, there were no errors by misapprehending the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules.

In addition, the argument that the judgment of the court below did not recognize the mental disorder of the defendant among the grounds of appeal is not a legitimate ground of appeal since the defendant's ground of appeal is raised only to the court of final appeal that the court below did not consider it as the ground of appeal or

Furthermore, even if examining ex officio, there is no error in the lower judgment as alleged in the grounds of appeal.

In addition, the argument that the court below erred by reversing the judgment of the court of first instance in order to treat concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, which sentenced a sentence heavier than that of the court of first instance to the number of days pending

However, according to Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing shall be allowed only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment or imprisonment without prison labor for not less than ten years

In this case where a more minor sentence is imposed on the defendant, the argument that the punishment is too unreasonable is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

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