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 was justifiable in maintaining the first instance judgment convicting the Defendant of the instant facts charged on the grounds stated in its reasoning. In so doing, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation in violation of the law, logical and empirical rules, or by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on legitimate defense or legitimate act in relation to the crime of interference with the execution of official duties

According to Article 383 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment or imprisonment without prison labor for not less than ten years is imposed, a final appeal shall be allowed on the grounds of unfair sentencing.

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

In addition, the argument that the defendant was in a state of mental or physical loss or mental weakness at the time of committing the crime of this case is asserted by the defendant as the ground for appeal or by the court below's ex officio decision, and it is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

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