A. Defendant 1) From around 2008, the Defendant suffered from the mental illness of shock disorder. At the time of each of the instant crimes, the Defendant was in a state of lacking the ability or decision-making ability to discern things from the wind that consumes alcohol at the time of each of the instant crimes, and satisfy satisfy with heavy satisfy, and thus, the Defendant lacks the ability to discern things or make decisions. 2) Imprisonment (one year and four months) sentenced by the lower court of unfair sentencing is too unreasonable.

B. The above sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Determination

A. According to each evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court and the data submitted by the Defendant, it is recognized that the Defendant was treated by showing symptoms, such as a flat impulse impulse disorder or bipolar impulse disorder, and that he was under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the instant crime.

However, in light of the circumstances leading to the instant crime, specific method of crime, Defendant’s behavior and attitude expressed before and after the instant crime, and the circumstances after the instant crime do not seem to have reached a state where the Defendant, at the time of the instant crime, was unable to discern things or make decisions due to mental illness or drinking, and thus, this part of the Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

B. We examine both the defendant and prosecutor's assertion of unfair sentencing.

The defendant recognized all of the crimes of this case in the trial of the court, and the defendant appears to have committed the crime of this case in the situation of being shocked upon being shocked by son upon being confined to the Juvenile Classification Review Board. The defendant paid a certain amount of compensation to K and Seoul Juvenile Classification Review Board, which is the victim of the obstruction of performance of performance of official duties and the crime of damaging public goods of this case, and the victim of the crime of damaging public goods of this case. The above K and Seoul Juvenile Classification Review Board do not want to be punished by the defendant. The victims of the crime of damaging property of this case are also victims