A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

A. The Defendant with mental disorder was under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the instant crime.

B. The sentence of the lower court that is unfair in sentencing (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the details of the instant crime committed by the Defendant at the time when the lower court duly admitted and investigated evidence, and various circumstances such as the Defendant’s speech and behavior before and after the commission of the crime, even though the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol at the time of the crime, it did not have the ability to discern things or make decisions.

As it is not recognized, the defendant's mental disorder argument is without merit.

B. We examine the determination of the unfair argument of sentencing, and even if the defendant had been punished several times due to the same crime, it is recognized that the defendant will proceed to the crime of this case during the period of the same repeated crime.

However, in full view of the following: (a) the Defendant led to the confession of the instant crime; (b) agreed with the victim G; (c) the victim D submitted a written application seeking the Defendant’s wife; (d) the degree of assault against the Defendant’s police officer; and (c) the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment; (d) the process and consequence of the instant crime; and (e) various sentencing conditions indicated in the instant pleadings, such as the circumstances after the commission of the crime, etc., the sentence of the lower court is somewhat unreasonable, and thus, the Defendant’s argument of sentencing is reasonable.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is with merit, and the judgment below is reversed and it is again decided as follows.

[Re-written judgment] The summary of facts constituting an offense and evidence recognized by the court is identical to the facts stated in each corresponding column of the judgment below, and thus, it is subject to Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.