A. The Defendant committed each of the instant crimes under the influence of alcohol with no or weak capacity to discern things or make decisions.

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

2. Determination

A. According to the record as to the assertion of mental and physical disorder, the defendant appears to have served alcohol at the time of each of the crimes of this case, but the victim of the traffic accident obstructed the report while posing the defendant's desire to report the driving of drinking alcohol or assault, and the police officer's assaulting the police officer as the victim would immediately take a bath at the time of arrest, it cannot be deemed that the defendant did not have the ability to discern things or make decisions at the time of each of the crimes of this case.

This part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.

B. As to the unfair argument of sentencing, each of the instant crimes committed by the Defendant, while driving a motor vehicle that was not covered by mandatory insurance while under the influence of alcohol and causing injury to the victim by causing a traffic accident, the victim assaulted the victim on the ground that the victim reported the occurrence of the traffic accident. The police officer dispatched to the scene of the said traffic accident who took a bath and assaulted the victim, continued to engage in assault and bodily injury while taking a bath to the police officer, and failed to comply with the demand for measurement of drinking without any justifiable reason, and the Defendant was not guilty of not complying with the demand for measurement of drinking without any justifiable reason, including two criminal records and eight criminal records. The most of the crimes committed by the Defendant, including the two criminal records and similar criminal records, is attributable to the same and similar criminal acts as the instant crime. The Defendant’s criminal records and tendency are considered to have a very weak awareness of compliance and ethics, and thus, the Defendant is likely to repeat the crime.