The judgment below

The part, excluding the dismissal of public prosecution, shall be reversed.

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

1. The lower court, among the facts charged in the instant case, rendered a judgment dismissing a public prosecution pursuant to Article 327 subparagraph 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the victim had withdrawn his/her wish to punish the Defendant after instituting the instant public prosecution, and sentenced him/her guilty of the remainder of the facts charged except for this. Since only the Defendant filed an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing, the part dismissing the public prosecution was separated and finalized as it is.

Therefore, the scope of this court's judgment is limited to the conviction among the judgment below.

2. The gist of the grounds for appeal asserts that the punishment imposed by the lower court (ten months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

3. In light of the fact that the Defendant was sentenced to four months of imprisonment for a violation of the Game Industry Promotion Act on December 5, 2013 and committed the instant crime on May 7, 2014, even if the execution of the sentence was completed on May 7, 2014 and was in a repeated crime period, and the Defendant obstructed the performance of official duties by assaulting the police officer, and inflicted an injury on the police officer, and the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties is a crime prejudicial to the State’s function by nullifying the legitimate exercise of public authority, and thus, there is a need to strictize it, and the Defendant has the history of punishment several times as the crime of obstruction of official duties and the crime of destruction of property in the past.

However, under the circumstances favorable to the defendant, the fact that the defendant recognized his mistake and against himself, that the court below agreed with the victims of property damage, that the defendant agreed with the victim of property damage, that the defendant agreed with the police officer who suffered damage, and that the degree of injury is not relatively much severe, etc., shall be taken into account as a favorable condition for the defendant. In addition, the arguments of this case and the sentencing indicated in the records, such as equity with punishment for other crimes similar to the crime of this case, Defendant’s age, character and behavior, environment, motive and circumstance of the crime, means and method