The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

The defendant was under the influence of alcohol at the time of the crime of this case, and due to fear of being confined to the prison and fear of extreme fear, the defendant was in the state of mental disorder or mental disorder.

The sentence of unfair sentencing (one year and six months of imprisonment) by the lower court is too unreasonable.

Judgment

In light of the background of the instant crime, the means and method of the crime, and the Defendant’s speech and behavior before and after the crime, etc. acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined in the lower court’s judgment as to the claim of mental disability, it is recognized that the Defendant was aware that he driven a drinking while on probation at the time of the instant case, but did not have the ability to discern things or make a decision because he was unable to feel extreme fear.

It is not recognized that it has reached a weak or weak state.

The defendant's assertion on this is without merit.

The circumstances are favorable to the Defendant’s decision on the assertion of unfair sentencing: (a) gathering knife while committing the crime of causing the injury of the special obstruction of performance of official duties in this case by contingency; (b) not focusing on the result of the injury inflicted by the police officer who is the victim; and (c) making an agreement with the said victim solely with the victim; and (d) taking the Defendant’s mistake into account.

However, the crime of this case is not very good for the Defendant to commit the crime of this case committed by a police officer who driven a scarb while drinking alcohol without a license even though he was in the period of probation under the condition of probation, and was dispatched after receiving the report.

The statutory penalty for the crime of bodily injury resulting from the Defendant’s special obstruction of performance of official duties constitutes imprisonment with prison labor for not less than three years, and the lower court, taking into account the aforementioned circumstances of the Defendant, sentenced to the maximum statutory punishment within the scope of discretionary mitigation, and otherwise sentenced to the Defendant’s age, character, environment and crime.