A. The Defendant, at the time of committing the instant crime, was physically and mentally weak due to the fraud damage.

B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing (the fine of 3.5 million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Even though the defendant was damaged at the time of the crime of this case, he did not have the ability to discern things or make decisions solely on such circumstance to the victim.

It is difficult to see that the defendant has reached a state or weak, and there is no other evidence to recognize mental or physical disability of the defendant, and the above argument is without merit.

B. The circumstances favorable to the Defendant include: (a) the Defendant led to the confession of the instant crime; and (b) the victim has no criminal history other than the instant crime; and (c) the fact that the instant vehicle is covered by comprehensive insurance and thus the recovery of the victim’s damage is guaranteed.

However, the crime of this case leaves the scene without taking any measure that causes damage to property by violating the duty of care while driving under the influence of alcohol with a large amount of alcohol content 0.107%, and in light of the form of the act, the crime of this case does not require agreement with the victim, and in full view of all the circumstances such as the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, occupation, motive or circumstance of the crime, means and result of the crime, etc., the sentence imposed by the court below cannot be deemed to be unfair because the sentence imposed by the court below is too unreasonable. Thus, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

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