2. On the grounds of appeal, the record reveals that the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the instant crime, but in light of the Defendant’s attitude and behavior at the time of committing the instant crime and immediately after committing the instant crime, the degree of the Defendant’s taking a statement by the victim, the amount of alcohol of the Defendant, etc., the Defendant did not have the ability to discern things or make decisions under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the instant crime.

Since it is not recognized that the defendant was in a state or weak condition, the defendant's assertion of mental disorder is without merit.

Next, although there are circumstances that the defendant did not have certain incomes, and there is a reason against the mistake on the assertion of unfair sentencing, the defendant did not pay the taxi driver a taxi fee, the police officer was dispatched due to not paying the taxi fee, and the police officer was asked the defendant's house, and the crime quality is not good, such as continuing to take a bath at the police station platform, continuing to give a disturbance, and avoiding disturbance, etc. It appears that the court below sentenced to a fine more mitigated than the fine prescribed in the summary Order in consideration of the circumstances favorable to the defendant already asserted by the court below, and taking into account various sentencing conditions as shown in the argument of this case, such as the method of the crime of this case, background of the crime, circumstances after the crime, the age and character of the defendant, etc., the punishment of the court below is unreasonable. Thus, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

3. The defendant's appeal is without merit. Thus, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.