A. At the time of each of the instant crimes, the Defendant was drunk and was in a state of mental disability.

B. The sentence of the lower court against the Defendant (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination on the grounds for appeal

A. According to the records of the instant case’s assertion of mental disability, even though the Defendant is deemed to have served alcohol at the time of each of the instant crimes, the Defendant does not seem to have the ability to discern things or make decisions due to drinking at the time of each of the instant crimes, in full view of the following circumstances: (a) the background and process of each of the instant crimes; (b) the means and method of the crime; and (c)

Therefore, this part of the defendant's assertion is rejected.

B. In light of all the sentencing conditions indicated in the records and arguments of this case including the fact that the defendant had a majority of criminal records on the assertion of unfair sentencing, the defendant repeated several times in the same way during the period of repeated crime due to the same crime, and did not recover damage, it is not recognized that the sentence imposed by the court below is too unreasonable on the ground of the reasons indicated in its reasoning.

Therefore, we cannot accept this part of the defendant's assertion.

3. 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.