A. When committing the instant crime, the Defendant was in a state of mental and physical disability due to depression and depression, etc.

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

2. Determination

A. In light of the background and method of the instant crime, the method and method of the crime, the process of the crime, and the Defendant’s speech and behavior immediately after the crime, etc. acknowledged by the court below’s lawfully adopted and examined evidence, it is not recognized that the Defendant did not have reached a state where the ability to discern things or make decisions due to depression, etc. at the time of the instant crime, and thus, this part of the Defendant’s assertion is

B. There are circumstances favorable to the Defendant, such as the confession and mistake of the instant crime, the motive and circumstance of the instant crime, and the fact that the Defendant is scheduled to give birth immediately.

However, murder is a serious crime of cutting human life, which is a valuable value that cannot be altered under this tax, and the result is very heavy and it is impossible to recover damage in any way. The crime of this case is likely to inflict pain on the victim at the time of committing the crime because the defendant murdered the victim's entrance and nose for four months after the birth of the defendant. In full view of all other circumstances, such as the defendant's age, character and conduct, character and environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, the circumstances after the crime, etc., the court below's punishment is too excessive and it is not recognized that this part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.

3. As such, the defendant's appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed under Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.