A. At the time of the instant case, the Defendant had no or weak ability to discern things or make decisions due to depression and met.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of mental disorder, it is recognized that the defendant had drinking alcohol at the time of the crime of this case, but in light of the circumstances such as the background, means, and circumstances after the crime of this case, the defendant did not have the ability to discern things or make decisions due to depression or drinking at the time of the crime of this case.

It is difficult to see that it has reached a weak or weak state.

Therefore, the defendant's mental disorder is without merit.

B. Although the Defendant’s judgment on the assertion of unfair sentencing is against the mistake by breaking the Defendant’s depth with respect to the instant crime, the Defendant: (a) even though he was under investigation by insulting the victim I by an insulting act at the police police force, he destroyed the Defendant’s house by setting fire against him; (b) there was a risk of causing serious damage to the life, body, property, etc. of the family members of the house residing in the house; (c) the degree of physical damage caused by fire is not easy and the damage is not recovered until now; and (d) the Defendant again committed each of the instant crimes even though he had had been punished several times of violent crimes including the damage of property, and all of the sentencing conditions shown in the argument of the instant case, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court recognized that the punishment is reasonable and it cannot be deemed unfair, and therefore, the Defendant’s assertion of unfair sentencing is not reasonable.

3. If so, the defendant's appeal is reasonable.