A. The Defendant, at the time of committing the instant crime, was in a state of weak ability to discern things or make decisions because he was suffering from alcohol ozone and depression for about ten (10) years since he was under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the instant crime. However, the lower court’s failure to recognize the Defendant’s mental disorder is unlawful.

B. Even if the court below found the defendant guilty of unfair sentencing, in light of the fact that the defendant's mistake recognizes the defendant's wrong and reflects it, the defendant received hospital treatment for a considerable period of time due to alcohol existence, etc., and the defendant's economic circumstances are not good, punishment (one million won of fine) imposed by the court below is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below regarding the assertion of mental disorder, although the defendant was in a state of drinking alcohol at the time of the crime of this case and was hospitalized due to the stimulative force of alcohol use, stimulative disorder before and after the crime of this case, in light of various circumstances, such as the course and process of the crime of this case, means and method, specific details of the crime, and the defendant's speech and behavior before and after the crime of this case, it does not seem that the defendant had the ability to discern things or make decisions due to drinking or the above mental disorder, the above argument of the defendant is without merit.

B. In full view of the circumstances leading up to the Defendant’s instant crime, the degree of damage and the amount of damage, whether the damage was recovered, the circumstances after the Defendant committed the same offense, the records of suspended execution or of fines imposed several times due to the same offense, and other circumstances that form the conditions for sentencing as indicated in the records and arguments, such as the Defendant’s age, environment and character and conduct, the sentence imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.

3. Thus, the defendant's appeal is without merit.