A. The Defendant was under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the instant crime, and was in a state of mental disability.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (fine 5 million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below regarding the assertion of mental disorder, the defendant appears to have been under the influence of alcohol at the time of the crime of this case. However, in light of the details and contents of the crime and the circumstances before and after the crime of this case, it does not seem to have reached the state of mental disorder. Thus, the above assertion by the defendant is without merit.

B. If there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the judgment of the court below on the assertion of unfair sentencing, and the sentencing of the court below is not beyond the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it

(see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The lower court determined the sentence against the Defendant by comprehensively taking into account the favorable circumstances and unfavorable conditions for the Defendant.

The circumstance that the defendant asserts as the reason for appeal (i.e., the confession and the primary charge) seems to have already been considered in the sentencing process of the court below.

In addition, there is no new change in circumstances that could change the sentence of the court below in the trial.

In full view of the following factors: (a) the Defendant’s character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime; and (b) the circumstances after the crime, including the fact that the degree of damage incurred by the crime of this case is not significant; (c) the lower court’s punishment cannot be deemed unfair because it goes beyond the reasonable scope of discretion.

(1) The defendant argues that the police officer's first tried to suppress the police officer without any justifiable reason and used violence during the process of resisting the police officer, and thus, the sentencing should be taken into consideration. However, in light of witness's statement, the above argument is rejected as it is without any justifiable reason.