The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

In light of the evidence duly admitted by the court below, the court below is justified in finding the defendant guilty of obstruction of the performance of special duties among the facts charged in this case.

In doing so, there is no violation of logical and empirical rules and the principle of free evaluation of evidence, nor there is any error of law by misunderstanding facts or misunderstanding relevant legal principles.

Meanwhile, according to the records, the defendant appealed against the judgment of the first instance, and argued only mistake of facts and unreasonable sentencing as the grounds for appeal.

In such a case, the argument that the court below erred in incomplete deliberation as to mental disorder is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

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

Therefore, in this case where a more minor sentence is imposed on the defendant, the argument that the punishment is too unreasonable cannot be a legitimate ground for appeal.

In addition, other grounds for appeal by the defendant do not constitute legitimate grounds for appeal under Article 383 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

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.