The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

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

B. The lower court’s sentencing (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the records of the judgment on the assertion of mental and physical disorder, even though the defendant was deemed to have a drinking condition at the time of the crime of this case, in light of the amount of the defendant's usual drinking, the background leading up to the crime, the means and method of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime of this case, the defendant was unable to discern things or make decisions due to drinking at the time of the crime of this case.

Since it seems that the defendant's mental and physical disability cannot be seen as being or weak, the defendant's argument is without merit.

B. We examine the argument of unfair sentencing, and recognize that the defendant's mistake is against his own mistake when he acknowledged the crime of this case.

However, the Defendant had the history of punishment for suspended execution and fine several times due to the same crime, and the Defendant again committed the instant crime even though he/she was sentenced to two years of suspended execution on March 22, 2013 due to the obstruction of performance of official duties, etc., and again committed the instant crime despite the period of suspended execution. The crime of obstruction of performance of official duties is a crime that undermines the State’s function by nullifying legitimate exercise of public authority, and thus requires strict punishment. In full view of the Defendant’s age, character, character, character, environment, intelligence and environment, motive, background, means, method and consequence of the instant crime, criminal record relation, and circumstances before and after the instant crime, etc., the Defendant’s sentence imposed by the lower court is too excessive and thus, it is not recognized that the Defendant’s assertion of unfair

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal of this case is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, since the defendant's appeal of this case is groundless. It is so decided as per Disposition.