The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. At the time of committing the instant crime, the Defendant was in a state of mental and physical loss or mental weakness by drinking alcohol.

B. In light of the circumstances leading up to the illegal crime of sentencing, the reflectivity of the defendant, family relationship, economic conditions, and the victim F’s wife, etc., the sentence of the first instance judgment (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 somewhat aware of the fact at the time of the crime in this case, in light of the defendant's usual drinking volume, the background leading up to the crime, the means and method of the crime, the defendant's attitude and speech before and after the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the defendant was in a state or lacks ability to discern things or make decisions due to drinking at the time of the crime in this case.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

B. It is recognized that the defendant's error in the judgment on the illegal argument of sentencing is divided, and the victim F wanted to take the defendant's preference, but there is a need to strictly punish a criminal who interferes with the performance of official duties, as in this case, in order to maintain the national function in a stable manner. The defendant committed the crime in this case during the suspension period of execution, such as interference with the performance of like official duties, violence, etc., even though he had already been punished several times as a fine, suspension of execution and imprisonment, and interference with the performance of official duties, etc., even though he had already been punished several times, and other circumstances such as the defendant's age, sex, sex, environment, family relationship, method of crime, degree of damage, circumstances after the crime, etc. are examined in detail, it is recognized that the sentence imposed by the first instance court against the defendant is appropriate.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

3. If so, the defendant-appellant.