The judgment of the court below is reversed.

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

However, for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. A. The Defendant is a crime with mental illness, such as alcohol cogniza, maluta disorder, etc., in which the Defendant lacks the ability to discern things or make decisions.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant (ten months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of all the circumstances, such as the Defendant’s speech and behavior at the time of the instant crime, the victim’s statement, etc., the Defendant cannot be deemed to have failed to have the ability to discern things or make decisions at the time of the instant crime. Therefore, the Defendant’s above assertion is rejected.

B. Each of the instant crimes in regard to the assertion on unfair sentencing is an unfavorable circumstance to the Defendant, even though the Defendant had had a history of criminal punishment for violent crimes, and even under the influence of alcohol, he/she saw the victims first and inflicted an injury on the victims, and not only interfered with the performance of duties by the police officers who received the report, but also caused an injury to the police officers.

However, taking into account the following factors: (a) the Defendant’s perception of the instant crime; (b) the Defendant appears to be against the Defendant’s health condition; (c) the Defendant paid indemnity money to the Government Employees Pension Corporation in relation to the medical expenses of police officers; (d) the Defendant agreed with the victim of injury; and (e) the Defendant appears to have caused the instant crime in a state where the Defendant did not receive appropriate mental treatment after cutting the right side; and (e) the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, health conditions, health conditions, environment, motive, background, means and consequence of the instant crime; and (e) the sentencing conditions indicated in the instant records and arguments, such as the circumstances after the crime, are too unreasonable.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is justified.