A. (1) Defendant (1) was under the influence of alcohol to commit the instant crime, and the Defendant had weak ability to discern things or make decisions.

(2) The sentence of the lower court (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the records on the Defendant’s assertion of mental and physical weakness, the fact that the Defendant was drunk at the time of the instant case is recognized, but the Defendant lacks the ability to discern things or make decisions.

It does not seem that it does not appear.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is not accepted.

B. The Defendant’s assertion of unfair sentencing by the Defendant and the prosecutor is favorable to the Defendant that the Defendant reflects the crime.

On the other hand, the following is disadvantageous.

The Defendant had a record of criminal punishment over several times for the same crime, and committed the instant crime again during the period of repeated crime for the same crime.

The defendant habitually drinks alcohol and repeats violence to the surrounding people.

In addition, the crime of this case is more likely to be a crime because it was committed by assaulting a police officer who is called out after receiving a report by the defendant that he was frightened, and is performing legitimate official duties.

The risk of recidivism is high in light of the criminal records and criminal behavior behavior and the attitude of lack of compliance awareness.

Since there is a need to punish the defendant strictly.

There was no agreement with the victim.

In addition, comprehensively taking account of the circumstances leading to the instant crime, Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, and circumstances after the commission of the instant crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment is not deemed to be too weak or unreasonable, and thus, the Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

3. Conclusion, the defendant.