A. At the time of the instant crime, the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol and had weak ability to discern things or make decisions.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the record of the determination on the assertion of mental and physical weakness, even though the Defendant was in a state of drinking alcohol at the time of the above crime, in light of the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant was in a state of weak ability to discern things or make decisions due to drinking, in view of the process, means and methods of the crime, and the Defendant’s speech and behavior before and after the crime

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

B. The fact that the Defendant made a confession of the instant crime and reflects his mistake, and that immediately after the crime, the Defendant returned the damaged goods to the victim is favorable.

However, the Defendant committed the thief in this case during the period of repeated crimes of the same kind, in particular, in consideration of the unfavorable circumstances such as the Defendant’s age, sex, occupation and environment, motive and circumstance leading to the instant crime, circumstances after the instant crime, etc., and the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable, and the Defendant’s aforementioned assertion is not reasonable, since it is not recognized that the Defendant’s punishment is too excessive and unreasonable, inasmuch as the statutory penalty applied to the Defendant is not less than two years of imprisonment, taking into account the favorable circumstances of the Defendant at the lower court, and there is no special change in circumstances in the trial.

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.