The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) is too unreasonable in light of the fact that the Defendant recognized the instant crime and is in violation of depth, and that the Defendant had no criminal record of interference with the performance of official duties, etc., the sentence of imprisonment (the imprisonment of four months, the suspension of execution of three years, the observation of protection, the lectures of alcohol treatment, 40 hours of community service work, 240 hours) by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. The judgment that the defendant recognized the crime of this case is favorable, and it is recognized that the defendant did not have any previous conviction for obstructing the execution of official duties.

However, the crime of this case was committed by assaulting police officers who were dispatched after receiving a report 112 on the crime of this case, with a high quality of crime and high possibility of criticism in terms of the law applicable to the crime, there are many criminal records similar to the defendant, and the defendant was not in good condition after the crime was committed by an investigative agency, such as denying the crime by the investigation agency or impairing the police officer's fault, etc. The defendant requires strict punishment for the crime of interference with the performance of official duties in order to eradicate the scambling of public authority and establishing the legal order of the State, and other factors such as the defendant's age, sex, sex, environment, motive, circumstance, means and consequence of the crime, and the scope of the sentencing guidelines set forth in the argument of this case (6 months to one year and six months) / [the scope of recommended punishment] [the scope of recommendation] [the scope of punishment for interference with the performance of official duties]], and there is no unfair punishment against the defendant without any specific punishment against the defendant.

3. In conclusion, 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 without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.