The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Even if the defendant asserts only unfair sentencing on the date of trial as the grounds for appeal, he/she did not clearly withdraw his/her claim for mental disorder stated in the statement of grounds for appeal, thereby examining this case.

Despite the fact that the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol and had no or weak ability to discern things or make decisions at the time of the instant crime, the lower court committed a mistake that did not recognize the Defendant’s mental and physical disorder.

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

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence admitted by the court below as to the assertion of mental disorder, although the defendant was in a state of drinking alcohol at the time of the crime of this case, he did not have the ability to discern things or make decisions at the time of the crime.

It does not seem that there was or was a weak state.

This part of the defendant's assertion is not accepted.

B. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court on the assertion of unfair sentencing, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, the appellate court should respect the sentencing of the first instance court.

(Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). In this case, there is no significant change in the sentencing conditions compared to the original judgment. In light of the following, the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable in light of the following: (a) the Defendant’s age and happiness environment; (b) the details and details of the instant crime; and (c) the circumstances after the instant crime, etc., as indicated in the arguments and records (in particular, the Defendant committed the act of obstructing the performance of his/her duties again during the period of suspended execution due to the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties).

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the conclusion is groundless.