2. It is recognized that the Defendant committed the instant crime under the lack of the ability to discern things or make decisions due to the disorder of fissionability, including the fact that the Defendant led to the confession of the instant crime and reflects his mistake; that there is no other criminal record except for the criminal punishment once a fine is imposed for the same kind of crime; and that the Defendant committed the instant crime under the state of lacking the ability

However, the crime of this case is deemed to have inflicted an injury on the victim by assaulting the victim, such as taking her head, etc., and the crime is considerably poor in light of the method and content of the crime, and the agreement with the victim or the recovery of damage seems to have not been properly performed. The court below seems to have determined the punishment by reducing the fine (one million won) of the summary order in consideration of the circumstances favorable to the defendant as seen earlier, taking into account the circumstances favorable to the defendant, and there are no special circumstances or changes in circumstances that may be newly considered after the decision of the court below, and other various sentencing conditions as shown in the argument of this case, such as equity in sentencing with the same or similar case, age, character and behavior, environment, motive and circumstance of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc., it is not recognized that the sentence imposed on the defendant is too unfair.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is not accepted.

3. The defendant's appeal is without merit. Thus, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.

(However, in accordance with Article 25(1) of the Regulation on Criminal Procedure, Article 70 of the "Article 70" of the 3rd 15 line of the original judgment shall be corrected as "Article 70(1)."