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

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

2. According to the record of judgment on the assertion of mental disorder, the defendant's drinking at the time of the instant crime is recognized.

However, in light of the background of the instant crime, the means and method of the crime, and the circumstances before and after the crime, etc., the Defendant had no or weak ability to discern things or make decisions.

It does not seem that it does not appear.

3. The instant crime of determining the illegality of sentencing is very bad in the nature of the instant crime, even though the Defendant, while under the influence of alcohol, was subject to a disposition of penalty notice by the police officer while he was frightened, and thus, assaulted the police officer who returned to the same place and was dispatched to the same place.

The defendant has a record of criminal punishment including punishment on several occasions due to violence, obstruction of performance of official duties, etc.

In 2016, even if the Defendant committed the instant crime during the suspended period, even though he/she was punished for a crime interfering with the performance of official duties, he/she cannot be convicted of the Defendant.

In addition, considering various sentencing conditions shown in the records and arguments, such as the age, character and environment of the defendant and the circumstances before and after the crime, the sentence of the court below against the defendant is too unreasonable.

4. 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.