A. The Defendant had a mental and physical weak condition under the influence of alcohol at the time of the instant case.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (one hundred months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In light of the Defendant’s speech and behavior or the circumstances before and after the crime of this case acknowledged by the record of judgment on the assertion of mental and physical weakness, etc., the Defendant was in a state that the Defendant had weak ability to discern things or make decisions due to drinking.

Therefore, the defendant's mental and physical weak argument is not accepted.

B. Considering the fact that the Defendant was aware of the fact of his criminal act, and there is no record of criminal punishment, etc., the instant crime was committed by the Defendant, i.e., setting the clothes in the joint house in which several generations reside without his spouse’s assaulting his or her spouse, and thus, the nature of the relevant crime was considerably poor. (ii) In particular, the Defendant did not take any particular measures against the Defendant even if he was a very dangerous act that may lead to large human life accidents, and his family members could have discovered and promoted it; (iii) even according to the Defendant’s statement, the Defendant appears to have been continuously exercised domestic violence against the victim for a period of 38 years (see, e.g., evidence record), and (iv) taking into account all other circumstances indicated in the record and the theory of sentencing, such as the record and changes after the crime, etc., of this case, the sentencing of the lower court cannot be deemed to be significant.

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