A. At the time of the instant crime, the Defendant had weak ability to discern things or make decisions under the influence of alcohol.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the records of the instant case’s assertion of mental and physical weakness, it is recognized that the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol at the time of the instant case, 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 fact that the Defendant’s judgment on the unfair argument of sentencing reflects the offense is favorable to the Defendant.

On the other hand, the following is disadvantageous.

The defendant has a record of criminal punishment against a large number of defendants by violence, obstruction of duties, obstruction of execution of official duties, etc.

Among them, the crime of this case was committed without being aware of the period of repeated crime after being sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for six months for the most recent crime of interference with business.

In addition, the crime of this case is more likely to be a crime because the defendant was dispatched to the police after receiving a report that the defendant puts a fright to the police who is under the influence of alcohol and assaulted the police officer who was 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.

In addition, comprehensively taking account of the circumstances leading up to the instant crime, Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, and circumstances after the commission of the instant crime, etc., even if the circumstances favorable to Defendant were fully considered, the lower court’s punishment is too excessive and inappropriate. Therefore, the Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

3. 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 groundless.