The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and four months.

except that, for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

The punishment sentenced by the court below (one year of imprisonment with prison labor and two years of suspended execution) is too unfluent.

Judgment

All of the crimes of this case are recognized by the defendant, and there is no criminal record exceeding the fine, and the fact that the defendant purchased a comprehensive insurance policy is favorable to the defendant.

However, the crime of this case is deemed to have been strictly punished in that the defendant was under the influence of punishment for drunk driving even though he had the record of punishment for drunk driving, and escaped after receiving the central separation stand, and assaults the police officer dispatched after receiving a report, which is highly likely to be subject to criticism, and the blood alcohol concentration exceeds 0.219%, and the police officer's act of obstructing the performance of official duties is likely to obstruct the establishment of legal order and undermine the authority of the public authority, and there is a need for strict punishment. In full view of all the various circumstances, including the defendant's age, occupation, character and behavior, environment, and circumstances after committing the crime of this case, it is deemed that the punishment of the court below against the defendant is too unreasonable.

The prosecutor's assertion of unfair sentencing is justified.

As the prosecutor's appeal is well-grounded, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is again decided as follows.

[Discied reasoning of the judgment below] Criminal facts and summary of evidence recognized by the court is identical to the facts constituting the crime and summary of evidence, and thus, the summary of evidence is identical to each corresponding column of the judgment below. Thus, it is acceptable in accordance with Article 369 of the

Application of Statutes

1. Article 148-2(1) and Article 44(1) of the former Road Traffic Act (amended by Act No. 17371 of Jun. 9, 202), Articles 148 and 54(1) of the Road Traffic Act (amended by Act No. 17371 of Jun. 9, 202), Articles 148 and 54(1) of the Road Traffic Act (the occupation of measures after accidents), and Article 136 of the Criminal Act.