The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is as follows: (a) the Defendant was drunk at the time of each of the instant crimes, and was in a state of mental disability; and (b) the lower court’s imprisonment (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of all the circumstances, such as the means and method of the instant crime, the Defendant’s act before and after the instant crime, and the circumstances after the instant crime, it appears that the Defendant was drunk at the time of each of the instant crimes, but did not have the ability to discern things at the time of each of the instant crimes, thereby lacking the ability to discern things or make decisions.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's argument is without merit.

B. The circumstances are that the Defendant, who claimed unfair sentencing, committed a crime of obstruction of performance of official duties only once, arrested as a flagrant offender, and later released again, find a district office to commit a crime of obstruction of performance of official duties, and thereby damaging public goods, etc. are not good. The Defendant responded to an investigation in an unfaithful manner in the course of the investigation, and did not reach an agreement with the victims or recover from damage until the trial, and the Defendant had three criminal records of the crime of damage to property, etc. that are disadvantageous to the Defendant.

However, in light of the following factors: (a) the Defendant made a confession of all of the instant crimes in the course of trial; (b) the Defendant seems to have seriously divided and reflected his mistake; (c) the degree of damage to the crime of causing property damage and the crime of damaging public goods is relatively minor; (d) the Defendant has no criminal record of suspended execution or higher; and (e) other factors that form the conditions for sentencing, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, motive, means, and circumstances after the instant crime, the lower court’s punishment is somewhat unreasonable.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's argument is justified.

3. As the appeal by the defendant is well-grounded, the judgment of the court below is reversed and pleadings are made in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act