A. The Defendant, who was physically and mentally weak, was under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the instant crime, and thus, should be mitigated from punishment.

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

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court, the Defendant appears to have been under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the instant crime.

However, in light of the background leading up to the crime, the Defendant’s speech and behavior, the means and method of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., there was a lack of ability to discern things or make decisions due to drinking at the time of the crime.

It does not seem that it does not appear.

In domestic affairs, even if the defendant was in a state of mental and physical weakness, in light of the fact that the defendant committed a crime under the influence of alcohol on several occasions even before the crime of this case and was punished, even if he predicted the risk of committing a crime after drinking, he/she was placed in a state of mental and physical weakness. Therefore, the so-called "free act in the cause" under Article 10 (3) of the Criminal Act cannot be mitigated for mental and physical weakness.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's argument is without merit.

B. The Defendant recognized all the facts charged in the instant case and reflected in the determination of the illegality of sentencing, and determined that the Defendant would not drink again through the next gold week and refrain from committing a crime.

By agreement with the victim, the injured party does not want to be punished against the defendant, and it seems clear that social ties, such as promising the family members and branch members to support the defendant's efforts, and wanting the wife.

However, the defendant was sentenced to a fine not less than 10 times due to the same criminal record, etc., and even if he had already been subjected to three times or more of suspended execution, he again commits the crime in this case during the suspended execution period.