A. The Defendant, at the time of committing the instant crime, was in a state of mental and physical loss or mental weakness by drinking alcohol.

B. The sentence sentenced by the first instance court (one year of imprisonment, confiscation) 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 aware of a certain degree of drinking alcohol at the time of the crime of this case, in light of the defendant’s usual amount, the background leading up to the crime, the means and method of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the defendant had no or weak ability to discern things or make decisions due to drinking at the time of the crime.

Therefore, the defendant's mental and physical disability cannot be accepted.

B. Although there are circumstances such as the Defendant’s misunderstanding of one’s mistake, the instant crime committed with dangerous articles and obstructing police officers’ performance of official duties, and the quality of the crime is not good. Although the Defendant had been punished by fine and imprisonment several times, the Defendant committed the instant crime again during the period of repeated crime even though he had been already committed several times, and there is no change in the sentencing conditions that may be particularly considered in the appellate trial, and even if considering the various circumstances, such as the Defendant’s age, sex, sex, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, the circumstances after the crime, etc., it is difficult to view that the first instance court’s punishment is unfair because it is too excessive.

Therefore, we do not accept the above argument of the defendant's above sentencing.

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