2. The judgment of this case is that the defendant assaulted the victim D, who is a driver of a taxi in operation, thereby causing injury, and assaulted the victim G, who is a police official dispatched after receiving a report to interfere with the legitimate performance of duties by the police officer, and at the same time, the victim G, who is a police official, was injured, and the crime is not good, and the crime is not good. In particular, the act of assaulting the driver of a vehicle in operation, in addition to the possibility of criticism about the violence itself, is likely to cause an additional accident, and damage the body or property of a third party, and it is highly likely that the third party may cause damage to the driver or police officer who suffered damage. The defendant did not take measures to recover the damage, and the victim maintains his/her intent to punish the defendant, it is necessary to punish the defendant accordingly.

However, it appears that the defendant did not dispute each of the crimes of this case in this court any longer, and it appears that the defendant committed each of the crimes of this case with the interest of alcohol, and that he committed each of the crimes of this case with the remainder contingently under the influence of alcohol, the degree of injury suffered by the victims is relatively minor, the defendant is the first offender who has no previous conviction, and the defendant is bound by the amount of 2 months, and it seems that he had an opportunity to reflect his mistake. The defendant's consciousness wanted to cause harm to the defendant, and the defendant's age, sex, environment, motive, background, means and result of the crime.