A. The Defendant committed the instant crime because he/she was unable to suppress thief’s desire due to depression with mental disorder, etc., and thus, at the time of committing the instant crime, he/she did not have or weak ability to discern things or make decisions.

B. The sentence of the lower court that is unfair in sentencing (the imprisonment of eight months and fine of three hundred thousand won) is too unreasonable.

2. The lower court’s judgment on the assertion of mental and physical disorder was duly adopted and investigated by the evidence, and the contents and circumstances of the instant crime, the Defendant’s behavior before and after the instant crime, and the Defendant’s statement in detail, and the Defendant did not drink the alcohol at the time of the instant crime in this court.

In light of the various circumstances, such as the statement, it is not deemed that the Defendant did not have or lacks the ability to discern things at the time of the crime, and thus, the above assertion is rejected.

3. It is recognized that the defendant recognized and reflected the facts of the crime of this case, and the victims do not want punishment against the defendant at the investigation stage by agreement with the victims.

However, the defendant has been punished several times due to the same crime, and the defendant's night intrusion theft crime of this case is committed by entering the residence of another person at night, and the risk of the act itself is high, and the amount of damage is also low.

In full view of the records of this case, including the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence leading to the instant crime, circumstances before and after the instant crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable, and there is no change in circumstances that may change the sentence of the lower court.