The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

The summary of the grounds for appeal (such as mental and physical weakness, mistake of facts, and improper sentencing) can be recognized that the defendant expressed a voice and expressed a desire as stated in the facts charged, even though he could not memory under the influence of alcohol at the time. However, there is no fact that the chest of the police officer or the police officer was pushed down, as stated in the facts charged.

At the time, the defendant was under suspension of the execution, and he was extremely careful.

The Defendant was under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the crime, thereby having weak ability to discern things or make decisions.

The sentence of the lower court (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

Judgment

A police officer D who was dispatched to the scene at the time and a witness E who reported to the police at the time to the police was given testimony that corresponds to all the facts charged at the court of original trial (the trial record 68-69, 73-75 page). E is also consistent with the statements of the above witness in the overall circumstances after the closure taken by the police at the time of the report and the dispatch of the police officer (the evidence record 105-107 page).

According to the above evidence of the court below, it is recognized that the defendant obstructed the execution of official duties by assaulting police officers D, such as the facts charged.

The court below did not err in the misapprehension of facts.

In light of the aforementioned D’s legal statement in the lower court (the trial record No. 71 of the trial record) and the circumstances leading to the instant crime to the effect that “at the time, the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol, but did not do so,” as to the assertion of mental and physical weakness, the Defendant had weak the ability to discern things or make decisions at the time.

shall not be appointed by a person.

The court below did not err in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the recognition of mental and physical weakness.

As to the illegal argument of sentencing, the defendant is against his fault.

The defendant has committed a contingent crime under the influence of alcohol, and has been working for the National Mental Health Center to receive mental treatment and make efforts for rehabilitation.

However, it has been sentenced to a fine due to interference with business, violence or injury.