2. Determination is recognized as follows: (a) the Defendant deposited the amount equivalent to the repairing cost for the public items that he was knicked for the State (330 thousand won); (b) the damaged police officer E, F, and G with KRW 200,000 each for the sake of the damaged police officer E, F, and G; (c) the Defendant has a family

However, in order to establish the legal order, there is a need to strictly punish crimes that interfere with the performance of official duties.

Although there are two or more criminal records of the same kind of fine, the defendant committed the crime of this case during the suspension of the execution of imprisonment with prison labor, and there is a need for strict punishment in order to achieve the preventive purpose of the punishment against the defendant.

I seem to appear.

In full view of the above circumstances and the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, family relationship, motive and background of the crime, means and consequence of the crime, etc., various sentencing conditions as shown in the argument of the instant case, and the scope of recommended sentence according to the sentencing guidelines for the enactment of the Supreme Court Sentencing Committee, the sentence of the lower court is too unreasonable.

Therefore, 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 on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.