A. The Defendant, who was physically and mentally weak, committed each of the instant crimes under the influence of alcohol, with weak capacity to discern things or make decisions.

B. Sentencing

2. Determination

A. According to the record as to the assertion of mental and physical weakness, even though the defendant committed each of the crimes of this case under the influence of alcohol, it does not seem that the defendant committed each of the crimes of this case under the influence of alcohol in light of the details and methods of each crime, the contents of the crime, and the conduct before and after the crime.

Defendant

The argument is without merit.

B. As to the wrongful assertion of sentencing, the Defendant led to confession and reflects on the crime.

However, considering other factors such as the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive and means of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment (one year and six months) is deemed reasonable within the reasonable scope of discretion, in view of the following: (a) the nature of the crime was extremely poor in light of the form of each crime, the object of the crime, the repetition of the act, the number of victims, etc.; (b) there was a history of having been punished several times of violent crimes; (c) the recidivism was committed during the period of the same kind of repeated crime; (d) the victims failed to recover from damage; and (e) the victims want to commit a serious punishment against the Defendant.

Defendant

The argument is without merit.

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.