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

B. The Defendant, for a period of 10 years, was physically and mentally deprived or physically weak at the time of committing the instant crime, as a person who was under medical treatment with alcohol alcohol for a period of 10 years.

2. Determination

A. The lower court’s judgment on the wrongful assertion of sentencing was determined within a reasonable scope by fully taking into account all the circumstances regarding the sentencing of the Defendant, and there is no circumstance to be newly considered in the trial. Therefore, even considering the circumstances asserted by the Defendant on the grounds of appeal, the lower court’s punishment is too large and unreasonable.

B. In light of various circumstances, such as the background leading up to the instant crime, the means and method of the crime, the process of the crime, and the Defendant’s act before and after the crime, etc., it is not deemed that the Defendant had no or weak ability to discern things at the time of the instant crime under the influence of alcohol, and thus, the above assertion by the Defendant cannot be accepted.

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.