A. The Defendant did not assault the police officer, and only accepted the application for a warrant of detention, a public document, and did not tear.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which judged otherwise and sentenced the defendant guilty is erroneous in misconception of facts.

B. At the time of committing the crime, the Defendant, under the influence of alcohol, was in a state of having no or weak ability to discern things or make decisions.

C. The sentence of the lower judgment on unreasonable sentencing (ten months of imprisonment, and a fine of five hundred thousand won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) Determination on the assertion of mistake of facts: (a) considering the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below; (b) the details of the assault are specifically stated in the statement prepared by the police officer immediately after the crime; (c) the above police officer consistently stated in the court of the court below as to the circumstances of the assault; and (d) CCTV images recorded on the face of the assault correspond to the above statements, the defendant's assertion is sufficient. The defendant's assertion is without merit; (b) the part of the damage to public documents; (c) the investigation report prepared on the day of the crime states that "the defendant has reduced the three pages of the application for the warrant of detention"; and (d) the photograph attached to the above report also conforms to the above statements; and (d) the defendant also stated in the prosecutor's office that "it is true that it is possible to tear or tear certain documents"; and (d) the defendant's confession of this part of the crime, which is a public document, is sufficient to recognize the facts of the defendant's application.

B. We examine the determination on the assertion of mental disorder, and examine the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below.