A. At the time of committing the instant crime with mental disorder, the Defendant was in a state of mental disorder or mental disorder due to the symptoms and depression of alcohol.

B. The court below's sentence of unfair sentencing (six months of imprisonment) against the defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below on the part of the claim of mental disorder, the defendant was not able to discern things or make decisions due to the fact that the defendant had been treated with alcohol respect and depression prior to the crime of this case, but was aware that he had drinking to a certain degree at the time, but did not have the ability to discern things or

Since it cannot be deemed that there was a state or weak, the above argument by the defendant is without merit.

B. The part of the Defendant’s assertion of unfair sentencing has a strong favorable circumstance, such as the fact that the Defendant led to the instant crime and reflects his mistake.

However, in light of various circumstances, such as the motive and circumstance leading to the instant crime, the circumstance before and after the instant crime, the defendant's age, character and conduct, occupation, family relationship, etc., which are the conditions for sentencing as shown in the records, and the sentence imposed by the court below is too unreasonable, considering the following factors: (a) the defendant was punished for the same type of crime; (b) the statutory penalty for the crime of violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (Habitual assault) is imprisonment for a limited term of not less than one year; (c) the defendant was unable to choose a fine; and (d) the defendant was unable to complete the execution of the sentence due to the same kind of crime; and (e) the period of repeated crime for which three months have not passed yet; and (e) the defendant's motive and circumstance leading to the instant crime

3. As such, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit.

However, the summary of the evidence in the reasoning of the judgment below is "1. Recording of the investigation report.