A. The Defendant had committed the instant crime under the condition of mental or physical loss or mental weakness. B. The sentence (six months of imprisonment) sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant, which was unfair in sentencing, is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the record on the assertion of mental and physical weakness, the Defendant was under drinking alcohol at the time of committing the instant crime, and was diagnosed as a stimulative disorder on July 18, 2017 due to the stimulative disorder, and even before being treated with the same symptoms, it appears that the Defendant had no or weak ability to distinguish things at the time of committing the instant crime, taking into account the circumstances leading up to the instant crime, the process of implementation, and the Defendant’s act before and after the instant crime.

does not appear.

The defendant's above assertion is rejected.

B. The Defendant recognized the objective facts of the instant crime and reflected in the judgment on the wrongful argument of sentencing.

In the court below, the defendant gave 1 million won to the victim and agreed, and the victim again tried to change the defendant's wife in the trial.

On the other hand, on April 26, 2017, the defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of 6 months of imprisonment with prison labor for larceny, etc. under the same year.

5.5. In full view of the following: (a) the Defendant’s age, sex, intelligence, environment, relationship with the victim, motive or circumstance before and after the crime was committed; and (b) the sentence imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable and unreasonable, taking into account all the factors of sentencing as indicated in the records and arguments of change, including the previous conviction for which the above judgment became final and conclusive; and (c) the crime of this case was committed during the period of the above suspension of execution.

There is no reason to believe that the sentencing of the defendant is unfair.

3. In conclusion, 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.