1. The judgment below is reversed.

2. The defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for five months;

3.Provided, That for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

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

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (five months of imprisonment) is excessively unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the record as to the assertion of mental disorder, although the defendant could have found that he had drinking alcohol at the time of the crime of this case, in light of various circumstances such as the background of the crime of this case, the conduct before and after the crime of this case, and the means and method of the crime of this case, the defendant did not have the ability to discern things at the time of the crime of this case.

It is difficult to see that it has reached a weak or weak state.

Therefore, the defendant's mental disorder is without merit.

B. As to the assertion on unfair sentencing, the instant crime was committed by the Defendant under the influence of alcohol so that the Defendant 850,000 won for repairing the above tent installed in the art room of the victim D, and the Defendant destroyed the above 402,881 won for repairing the said vehicle by going through the Bobs of the victim G-owned vehicle. When the police officer J’s scamboo that was dispatched upon receipt of the report was taken by hand, the Defendant obstructed the performance of official duties of the said police officer. As such, the instant crime of obstruction of performance of official duties requires strict punishment since it constitutes a violation of legitimate public authority, and the Defendant had been punished three times in the past, and there are other unfavorable circumstances such as the fact that the Defendant had been punished three times for violent crimes.

However, the fact that the defendant recognized the crime of this case and reflected it, that the defendant paid the victim D and G for the crime of causing property damage, that the defendant agreed with the above victims, that the defendant does not want the punishment of the defendant by mutual agreement with the J of the police officer, and that the defendant is detained for about two months, and that the defendant has time of self-esteem.