A. Although the Defendant was unable or weak to discern things or make decisions by drinking alcohol at the time of committing the instant crime, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on mental and physical disorder, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In light of the background, process, means and method of the instant crime, the Defendant’s behavior before and after the instant crime was committed, etc. as revealed in the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, it is deemed that the Defendant was aware of drinking at the time of the instant crime, but it does not seem that the Defendant did not have the ability to discern things or make decisions, and thus, the above assertion by the Defendant is rejected.

B. As to the assertion on unfair sentencing, the Defendant was not only aware of an unfolding food in the restaurant operated by the victim, but also committed the crime in violation of the quality of the crime, the Defendant was punished for the same kind of crime, such as obstruction of business, and the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for larceny, etc. at the Seoul Eastern District Court on August 11, 201, and the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of one million won on January 14, 2012, and is currently under the period of repeated offense as of January 14, 2012 after the execution of the sentence was completed, and is still under the period of suspended sentence for four months due to larceny, etc. at the Sungwon District Court Sungwon Branch Branch on January 27, 2012, and was under probation after being sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for two years and probation for four months due to larceny, etc. in spite of the fact that the Defendant committed the crime in this case, and thus, the Defendant’s allegation that the above Defendant’s punishment is reasonable.

3. Accordingly, the defendant's appeal is without merit and Article 364 of the Criminal Procedure Act is not reasonable.