A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two months.

A. The Defendant had no or weak ability to discern things or make decisions under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the instant crime.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (4 months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for ex officio appeal.

"A crime for which judgment to face with imprisonment without prison labor or heavier punishment has become final and a crime committed before such judgment has become final and conclusive" shall constitute concurrent crimes prescribed in the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act. In such cases, a punishment shall be imposed in consideration of equity in cases where a crime among concurrent crimes has become final and conclusive under Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act and a crime for which judgment has not become final and conclusive

According to the records, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years on June 28, 2016 to a crime of interference with his/her duties in the support of the Suwon Friwon, and the judgment became final and conclusive on January 21, 2017, and on November 3, 2016, the Defendant was sentenced to one year of imprisonment with labor for interference with duties, etc. in the support of the Suwon Friwon Friwon Friwon Friwon Friwon Friwon Friwon Friwon Friwon Frig, and the judgment became final and conclusive on March 13

Therefore, the judgment of the court below that did not sentence the instant crime with regard to the case of the crime of this case at the same time with the crime of interference with duties which became final and conclusive by each of the above judgments can no longer be maintained.

However, the defendant's argument about mental disorder is still subject to the judgment of this court, despite the above reasons for reversal of authority.

B. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of mental disorder among the grounds for appeal, the defendant was found to have been under the influence of alcohol at the time of the crime of this case, but in light of the process, method and method of the crime of this case, the defendant's statement after the crime of this case, etc., the defendant was under the influence of alcohol at the time of the crime of this case, and

section 2.2.