A. At the time of the instant crime, the Defendant had weak ability to discern things or make decisions.

B. The punishment of the lower court (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In light of various circumstances, such as the background of the instant crime and the Defendant’s act before and after the instant crime, which were acknowledged by the lower court based on the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court, the Defendant had weak ability to discern things or make decisions at the time of the crime.

It does not seem that it does not appear.

B. According to the argument and record of the instant case’s determination of the unfair argument of sentencing, the lower court appears to have been reasonably determined by fully considering the various sentencing grounds asserted by the Defendant, and there is no special circumstance to ex post facto change the sentencing.

3. If so, the defendant's appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.