A. At the time of the instant case, the Defendant had a weak mental and physical disorder, such as the fall of judgment, memory disorder, shock disorder, and shock disorder, by taking the drugs prescribed in the I Hospital into her hospital due to alcohol dependence, influence, and so on.

B. The lower court’s imprisonment (six months of imprisonment) against the Defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As the Defendant alleged that he/she had taken the drugs at the time of the instant case, it is insufficient to recognize that the Defendant used the drugs at the time of the instant case on August 19, 2014, the date when the instant medical prescription occurred is more than 2 weeks but not less than 2 weeks after the date of the instant prescription, and the Defendant stated in the investigative agency that he/she refused the measurement of alcohol by considering the following facts: (a) although the Defendant was aware that he/she had taken medical treatment with alcohol dependence at I Hospital and was given prescription, the record of the instant case is recognized as follows; (b) the date when the Defendant was given a prescription at I Hospital on August 3, 2014; and (c) the instant medical prescription alone is insufficient to recognize that the Defendant used the drugs at the time of the instant case. (d) When considering that the Defendant stated in the investigative agency that he/she refused the measurement of alcohol by deeming that he/she was in a state of taking the drugs at the time of the instant medical prescription.

Furthermore, even if the Defendant used the above drug at the time of the instant case, it appears that the Defendant knew of the fact that the influence of judgment, memory disorder, and shock disorder may occur when drinking while taking the above drug during the use of the above drug. Thus, the provision on mitigation of the person with mental disability cannot be applied pursuant to Article 10(3) of the Criminal Act.

I would like to say.

Therefore, we cannot accept the above argument of the defendant and his defense counsel.

B. The defendant's decision on the assertion of unfair sentencing recognizes the facts of crime itself and reflects on it, and the elderly old age with disability.