The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) by the lower court (one year of imprisonment with prison labor) is unreasonable.

2. The Defendant recognized the instant crime.

The defendant agreed with the victim D, and deposited for police G and H.

However, interference with the execution of public duties needs to be strictly punished for the establishment of public authority and the protection of legal order, and more strict measures are required for interference with the performance of special duties such as this case.

In particular, the Defendant committed the instant crime even though he/she was sentenced to 8 months of imprisonment and 2 years of suspended execution on May 21, 2014 due to interference with the execution of official duties. The lower court appears to have determined the sentence against the Defendant in consideration of the circumstances favorable to the sentencing as seen earlier, and there is no special change in circumstances that may be considered in sentencing after the sentence of the lower judgment.

In addition, comprehensively taking account of the Defendant’s age, sex, occupation and environment, motive and circumstance after the commission of the crime, and all other factors of sentencing as indicated in the instant case’s records and changes, even if considering the favorable circumstances of the Defendant as seen earlier, the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable.

Therefore, we cannot accept the defendant's above assertion.

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.