The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for not more than ten months.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. At the time, the Defendant was physically and mentally weak due to alcohol dementia, bipolartic disorder, etc.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. According to the record of determination on the assertion of mental and physical weakness, even though the fact that the defendant suffers from alcohol dementia, etc. is recognized, in light of the background and method leading up to the crime of this case, and the statement and behavior of the defendant before and after the crime of this case, the defendant had weak ability to discern things or make decisions due to the above disability at the time of the crime of this case.

Since the defendant's mental and physical weakness are not visible, it is not acceptable to accept the defendant's argument.

3. The instant crime of this case’s crime of determining the illegality of sentencing was committed against a fire officer dispatched by the Defendant upon receiving a report of 119, and obstructed the performance of official duties by pushing the fire officer’s ebbbbbage. The crime of obstructing the performance of official duties is an offense that undermines the function of the State by nullifyinging the legitimate exercise of public authority, and thus requires strict punishment. The Defendant has been punished several times due to the same kind of crime, including imprisonment, and in particular, the Defendant committed the instant crime even if he had committed a repeated crime due to interference with the performance of official duties in the holding of the lower court, and in view of the fact that he committed the instant crime.

However, the fact that the defendant generally recognized the defendant's mistake, made efforts to reach an agreement with the damaged fire-fighting officer, and as a result, the fire-fighting officer consented to the provision of his personal information necessary for the deposit of the damaged fire-fighting officer, and the fact that the defendant deposited KRW 500,000 for the damaged fire-fighting officer in the trial is considered as favorable to the defendant. Other arguments and records of this case, such as the defendant's age, health status, sex, environment, motive and background of the crime, means and method of the crime, and circumstances after the crime.