A. Defendant 1) At the time of the instant crime, the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol and had no or weak ability to discern things.

2) The punishment sentenced by the lower court (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor - The above sentence sentenced by the lower court is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Determination

A. According to each evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court regarding the assertion of mental disorder, it is recognized that the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the instant crime.

However, in light of the circumstances leading to the instant crime, the specific method of crime, the Defendant’s behavior and attitude expressed before and after the instant crime, and the circumstances after the instant crime, etc., the Defendant had no ability to discern things or make decisions due to drinking at the time of the instant crime, or had weak ability to do so.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.

B. We also examine each of the defendant and prosecutor’s wrongful arguments in sentencing.

The fact that the defendant recognized the crime of this case, the defendant also sustained a certain amount of injury from the victim E at the time of the crime of this case, and the fact that the defendant has no record of criminal punishment until now, etc. are favorable to the defendant.

On the other hand, the crime of this case was committed by the victim who was next to the victim while the defendant was under the influence of alcohol with his will and caused serious injury to the victim's face by taking the victim's face, and the nature of the crime is not good. Even though the victim suffered damage to undergo an operation and undergo an additional treatment for a considerable period of time due to the crime of this case, the victim did not recover from the damage properly caused to the victim, and the defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for past violent crimes.