The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence imposed by the court below (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). The crime of obstruction of performance of official duties needs to be avoided legitimate exercise of public authority and be strict as an act that undermines the function of the State’s legal order and order, and the Defendant committed a crime of obstruction of official duties without being taken into custody to the police station for suspicion of assaulting taxi drivers, and the nature of the crime is also poor.

The judgment below

There is no new reason to consider the sentencing after the sentence, and the defendant committed the crime of this case during the same repeated crime period and has been punished several times for violent crimes. In full view of all the sentencing conditions shown in the records and arguments of this case, the punishment sentenced by the court below is appropriate.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.