A. At the time of committing the instant crime, the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol and had no or weak ability to discern things or make decisions.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the record of the judgment on the assertion of mental and physical disorder, even though the defendant was deemed to have a drinking condition at the time of the crime of this case, in light of the following circumstances, such as the course and process of the crime of this case, the means and method, and the defendant's speech before and after the crime of this case, the defendant did not have the ability to discern things

Therefore, this part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.

B. Although the defendant's wrong determination on the assertion of unfair sentencing is recognized. However, the crime of this case was committed by the defendant by assaulting the police officer in the course of performing his/her duties, and the case is not somewhat weak, the injured police officer wants to punish the defendant, and the defendant has the record of being punished ten times for violent crimes as well as being sentenced in August 2006 by the suspension of execution 2 years and June 2008 due to the obstruction of performance of official duties. In addition, the defendant has the record of being punished ten times for violent crimes, taking into account the circumstances of the crime of this case, circumstances after the crime, the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, etc., and other various sentencing conditions specified in the argument of this case, it is not recognized that the sentence of the court below is too unreasonable. Thus, this part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.

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