A. At the time of committing the instant crime, the Defendant was in a state of mental disorder or mental disability with mental disorder.

B. The six-month imprisonment sentenced by the lower court is too unreasonable and unfair.

2. Determination

A. According to the records of this case as to the defendant's mental and physical disorder, although the defendant was deemed to have a drinking condition at the time of the crime of this case, considering such circumstances, the defendant did not have the ability to discern things or make decisions at the time of the crime of this case in light of the background, means and methods of the crime of this case, the defendant's attitude and words before and after the crime of this case, and the circumstances after the crime

It does not seem to be in a state or weak.

This part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.

B. We examine the argument of unfair sentencing: although it is recognized that the defendant recognized the facts charged in this case and against the wrong judgment, the defendant needs to strict punishment for obstruction of performance of official duties in order to protect the legitimate performance of duties of the State and to establish sound social order, the defendant is in absence on two occasions at the date of the original judgment; the defendant has been punished by a fine for the same crime; the defendant committed the crime in this case without being aware of the suspension of execution; the defendant committed the crime in this case; there is no special change in circumstances to change the sentence of the lower court after the sentence of the lower judgment was sentenced; and there is no other change in circumstances to change the sentence of the lower court after the sentence of the lower court was sentenced; and there is no reason to believe that the sentence of the lower court is unfair because it is too unreasonable. Accordingly, this part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.

3. As such, the defendant's appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed under Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.