A. Even though the Defendant committed each of the crimes in this case in a state of mental disability due to symptoms of stimulative disorder and symptoms of stimulative disorder, etc., the lower court found the Defendant guilty that the Defendant committed each of the crimes in this case in a normal state of mental disorder.

B. The lower court’s imprisonment (four years of imprisonment) on the ground of unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the record of determination on the claim of mental disability, it is recognized that the Defendant received pharmacologic treatment and counseling treatment in a mental hospital from around 2015 due to symptoms of decentralization disorder, apprehensions, depression, etc.

However, in light of various circumstances, such as the content and method of each of the instant crimes, and the Defendant’s act before and after the instant crimes, it does not seem that the Defendant had weak ability to discern things or make decisions at the time of each of the instant crimes.

Therefore, the defendant's argument of mental disability is without merit.

B. If there is no change in the sentencing conditions compared to the lower court’s judgment on the assertion of unfair sentencing, and the sentencing of the lower court is not beyond the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect

(See Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). No new sentencing data is submitted to the Defendant, and there is no particular change in the sentencing conditions compared with the original judgment.

The circumstances alleged by the defendant as the grounds for appeal are considered to have already been reflected in the decision of the court below on the defendant's punishment.

In full view of the various sentencing conditions shown in the records and pleadings, the lower court’s sentence against the Defendant exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit.

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act because the defendant's appeal is without merit.