1. The judgment below is reversed.

2. The defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for two years;

3.Provided, That the period of four years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive shall be the same.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the grounds for appeal (two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The instant crime was committed on January 1, 2013 by the Defendant: (a) obstructing the performance of official duties by displaying a food to a police officer who frighting the Defendant’s plaque at a drinking point; (b) driving on November 27, 2015; (c) driving on drinking on February 16, 2016; and (d) driving on driving on drinking again on February 16, 2016; and (b) driving on driving on drinking and without a license to drive on February 16, 2016; and (c) driving on a vehicle by disregarding the stop signal to find a police officer who controls drinking while driving on drinking or without a license, and causing an injury to the controlling police officer by neglecting the stop signal.

Defendant has been punished not less than 20 times for the same and different types of crimes.

On the other hand, the defendant is attempting to commit a crime and is against the wrongness.

The injury caused by the victim G of the crime caused by interference with the performance of special duties is not severe.

Police officers do not want the punishment of the defendant against the victim of the crime that was injured by interference with special duties and interference with the performance of public duties.

The defendant has returned to farming, gather his father, and live faithfully.

In full view of all circumstances, including these circumstances, including the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive, means and consequence of the commission of the crime, and the circumstances after the commission of the crime, the sentence imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the defendant's appeal is with merit, and the judgment below is ruled again as follows.

【Inasmuch as the judgment of dismissal is the same as the facts constituting the crime and the summary of the evidence recognized by the court, and the summary of the evidence are the same as the stated in each corresponding column of the judgment below, it shall be quoted as it is in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant provisions of the Act concerning facts constituting the crime;