A. Defendant 1) The Defendant with mental disorder was in the state of mental disorder or mental disability by drinking alcohol at the time of committing an offense on the wind of drinking alcohol under the influence of drugs due to depression, etc.

B. The lower court’s sentencing is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In light of the background leading up to the Defendant’s crime, the means and method thereof, the Defendant’s attitude and behavior before and after the commission of the crime, and the circumstances after the commission of the crime, etc., the fact that the Defendant was suffering from the mental and behavior disorder due to the use of alcohol, even though he was aware of the fact that the Defendant had drinking alcohol at the time of the commission of the crime, it cannot be deemed that the Defendant did not have the ability to discern things or make decisions.

B. The Defendant recognized the mistake of the Defendant on the assertion of unfair sentencing by the Defendant and the prosecutor and agreed with the victim of special assault.

On the other hand, the defendant has been sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties and has been punished several times for violent crimes, and has committed another crime during the period of repeated crimes due to the same violent crimes.

In full view of the following circumstances, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, motive, background, means and consequence of the crime, etc., and the fact that there are no special circumstances or changes in circumstances that may change the sentencing of the lower court after the crime, the lower court’s sentencing is not unfair.

3. The appeal filed by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit, and all of the appeals are dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.