A. At the time of each of the instant crimes, the Defendant was in a state of mental and physical loss or mental weakness by drinking alcohol.

B. The punishment of six months of imprisonment sentenced by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the records of this case as to the assertion of mental disorder, even though the defendant was in a drunken state at the time of each of the crimes in this case, considering such circumstances, it is not deemed that the defendant did not have the ability to discern things or make decisions at the time of each of the crimes in this case, or did not have the ability to discern things or make decisions.

This part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.

B. The defendant recognized the facts charged in this case and reflected his mistake in the judgment of the court below. The defendant was aware that the court below agreed smoothly with D among the victims of this case, but the defendant committed each of the crimes in this case without being aware of at least 5 times during the period of suspension of execution due to the same kind of crime, 1 times of suspended execution due to the same crime, 10 times of fine due to the same crime, and 10 times of fine. There is no special change in circumstances to change the sentence of the court below after the sentence of the court below was sentenced, and there is no other reason to change the defendant's age, sex, environment, family relationship, circumstances after the crime, etc., the court below's punishment is too unreasonable. Thus, this part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.

3. As such, the Defendant’s appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed pursuant to Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench (Article 2 of the Criminal Procedure Act).