All appeals by the Defendant against the judgment of the first instance and by the Prosecutor against the judgment of the second instance are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant (Defendant 1) committed a crime of obstruction of the performance of official duties and a crime of violation of the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act, but the first instance court erred in the evaluation of the number of crimes by deeming it as a substantive concurrent crime. 2) The Defendant with mental disorder was under the influence of alcohol at the time of the instant crime, and was in the state of mental disorder.

3) The sentence imposed by the court below of the first instance on the defendant (one half-month imprisonment and a fine of 600,000 won) is too unreasonable.B) According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, such as the prosecutor (the second instance judgment as to the lower judgment), the victim’s statement, and the photograph of seized articles, the second instance court acquitted the Defendant of this part of the facts charged by misapprehending the legal principles or by misapprehending the legal principles.

2) The sentence imposed by the court below of the second instance on the defendant (a fine of four million won is too unhued and thus unfair).

2. Determination

A. As to the judgment of the court of first instance as to whether the defendant has reversed the consolidated examination, the prosecutor filed an appeal against the judgment of second instance, and the court also tried each appeal by combining each appeal case.

However, the crime of the judgment of the court below in Article 2 is committed by the defendant who was sentenced to a two-year suspended sentence to six-month imprisonment due to obstruction of business and damage to property by the Incheon District Court before November 26, 2015 becomes final and conclusive. However, in addition to the above previous conviction, the defendant was sentenced to a three-year suspended sentence on August 1, 2015 and was sentenced to a three-year suspended sentence on the ground of a violation of the Road Traffic Act in the Incheon District Court's Branch Branch Office, separately from the above previous conviction, and the crime for which the judgment became final and conclusive on November 26, 2015 was committed before the judgment became final and conclusive on August 1, 2015. Thus, the crime of which judgment became final and conclusive on November 26, 2015 and the crime of the judgment of the court of second instance cannot be judged simultaneously from the beginning, and thus, the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal

However, there is no judgment that became final and conclusive on November 26, 2015, and on November 26, 2015.