A. The court below erred by misunderstanding the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, where the defendant, who had been physically and physically under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the crime of this case, was guilty.

B. The punishment of the lower court (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court on the assertion of mental and physical weakness, it is recognized that the Defendant had drinking a considerable amount of alcohol immediately before the crime of this case, but, in light of the Defendant’s ordinary drinking volume, the background and method of the crime, the means and method thereof, the Defendant’s behavior before and after the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., it was deemed that the Defendant was in a state that the Defendant had the ability

It is not recognized.

The above assertion by the defendant is without merit.

B. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court’s determination on the unfair argument of sentencing, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015, etc.). The instant crime is a case where a police officer dispatched after a false report was sent by the Defendant, thereby obstructing the performance of his duties and causing injury to the police officer.

The lower court takes into account ① the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant had been subject to punishment several times due to violent crimes, etc.; (b) the Defendant is under repeated crimes of the same kind; (c) the Defendant committed the instant crime without being subject to a fine even though he was sentenced to a fine due to interference with his duties during the repeated crime period; and (d) the Defendant did not recover from damage to the victim; (b) under favorable circumstances, the Defendant appears to have committed the instant crime under the condition that he would have committed the instant crime under the condition that he would have committed the instant act, even though he was under the control of a person with disability of class 6.