The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, at the time of committing the instant crime, was in a state of mental disorder or mental disability by drinking alcohol at the time of committing the instant crime, and the first instance court erred by neglecting its judgment despite the first instance court’s assertion as above.

B. The punishment of the first instance court on the unfair sentencing (the imprisonment of eight months and the fine of three hundred thousand won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the protocol of the first instance trial as to the assertion of mental and physical disorder and the omission of judgment, the defense counsel of the defendant at the date of the first instance trial of the first instance court stated to the effect that he would not memory much drunk at the time of the instant case, but should recognize the facts charged. The defendant stated to the effect that he would recognize the facts charged even though he did not memory at the time of the instant case, but tried to unsatisfe the locks because he was bound by the police station, and entered the detention room, and that he would be aware of the facts charged. It is difficult to view that the above statement alone alone made a statement that the defendant interfered with the establishment of a crime under Article 323(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act or

(A) Even if the Defendant appears to have claimed a mental disorder in the first instance trial, it cannot be deemed that there was an error of law that affected the conclusion of the judgment, unless the Defendant asserted a mental disorder, as seen below. In addition, the following circumstances as indicated in the record, namely, ① the Defendant reported a 112 report that he was under the influence of alcohol without paying a taxi fee, and led to the instant crime during the police officer being dispatched to the police station and waiting for the payment of the fine, and ② the Defendant sought the Defendant by asking the police officers who were arrested as a flagrant offender immediately after the instant case, and ③ the Defendant was also bound by the police station at the time of the first instance trial and sought the Defendant to take the Defendant at the time when he was waiting for the payment of the fine.