The defendant's appeal and prosecutor's appeal are dismissed.

In light of the summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair punishment) that the Defendant is against the mistake of the Defendant, and that the Defendant committed the instant crime by contingency in the process of breathing police officers under the influence of alcohol, the Defendant found the victimized police officers, and sought a letter of apology and boom, and deposited a certain amount for the victimized police officers, and there is no record of criminal punishment, the lower court’s sentence imposing a fine of KRW 7,00,000 is too unreasonable.

In light of the fact that the nature of the instant crime committed by the Defendant by the public prosecutor is not good, the degree of interference with the performance of official duties of the victimized police officers is serious, the scope of recommendation according to the sentencing guidelines for the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties, which was enacted by the Sentencing Committee of the Supreme Court, is from 6 months to 1 year and 4 months, and requires strict punishment for the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties, etc., the sentence of the lower court is too unreasonable

Judgment

The crime of this case is not likely to obstruct the performance of official duties of the victimized police officer by assaulting the victim police officer's head at one time and three times at the right right end by walking the face of the victimized police officer E twice in drinking, and walking the Hebbbbbbbb, etc., which requires treatment for about two weeks, while the defendant was under the influence of alcohol. The crime of this case is not likely to obstruct the performance of official duties of the victimized police officer. The degree of interference by the crime of this case is not easy. On the other hand, the defendant's mistake is recognized, and the defendant committed the crime of this case under the influence of alcohol, and the degree of injury suffered by the victimized police officer is not relatively heavy, the defendant's direct recovery of the damaged police officers, and the defendant's escape was damaged and damaged, and the amount of damage was not specified in the judgment below.