beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to mental and physical disorder, which judged otherwise in light of the fact that the defendant committed each of the crimes in this case under the influence that he was unable to discern things or make decisions due to a mental and physical disorder under the influence of alcohol.
B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. In light of the process, means and method of each of the crimes in this case, the defendant's act before and after the crime was committed, etc. as revealed in the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, it cannot be deemed that the defendant was under the influence of alcohol at the time of each of the crimes in this case, and thus, the defendant's allegation above is rejected.
B. As to the assertion on unfair sentencing, the Defendant’s act of abusing force related to violence, including the force of punishment imposed due to the obstruction of performance of official duties, the violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, and the crime of injury, etc., the Defendant committed each of the crimes of this case without being aware of even though he was during the repeated period. The Defendant’s act of neglecting public authority among the crimes of this case affects the police officers’ duties to protect the peace and safety of citizens, and eventually, it is necessary to punish the damage as it eventually goes back to the citizens. In full view of all the circumstances, including the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, environment, background of the crime, means and method of the crime, etc., which are the conditions for sentencing specified in the argument of this case, such as the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, and environment, and deposit KRW 2 million with the police officers to the extent that the lower court’s punishment should be reversed, and thus, is unreasonable.