The judgment of the court below is reversed.

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

Provided, That the above punishment shall be imposed for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment with prison labor for ten months) by the lower court is too unreasonable;

(2) On the first day of the appellate trial, the Defendant’s allegation of mental disorder was withdrawn on the trial date. 2. The fact that the Defendant used three police officers who were in lawful performance of official duties in an excessive manner while complying with several police officers, and that the Defendant did not receive a letter of suspicion from the police officers who were assaulted by the Defendant, is an unfavorable circumstance.

However, it is advantageous to the fact that the defendant led to the confession and reflect of the crime of this case, although the defendant was punished for violent crimes in 1991 and 197, there was no record of committing the crime of this case as well as the crime of this case, and that there was no record of committing the crime of this case. The crime of this case does not reach the degree of serious damage suffered by police officers, the defendant seems to have committed a somewhat contingent crime, and there was a circumstance that could be considered in the circumstances leading to the crime of this case.

In this context, when comprehensively considering the sentencing conditions such as the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, and circumstances after the crime, the sentence of the court below is too unreasonable.

3. Since the appeal by the defendant is well-grounded, the judgment below is reversed pursuant to Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the following is ruled again after pleading.

[Discied reasoning of the judgment] Criminal facts and the summary of the evidence admitted by the appellate court and the summary of the evidence are the same as the stated in each corresponding column of the judgment of the court below. Thus, they are cited in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the relevant criminal facts;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes Act;

1. Selection of imprisonment or imprisonment with prison labor;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on probation;

1. The order is based on the same reasons as stated in the judgment on the allegation of unfair sentencing on the grounds of sentencing under Article 62-2(1) of the Social Service Order Criminal Act.