A. The Defendant was in a state of mental disorder under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the instant crime.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant asserts to the effect that, under the influence of alcohol, the Defendant had no or weak ability to discern things at the time of committing the instant crime.

In light of the records of this case, the defendant was under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the crime of this case, and the defendant was subject to mitigation of mental and physical disability due to drinking in Seoul District Court Decision 2003No3883, Jun. 19, 2003; it is recognized that the above facts showing alcohol dependence; however, it is difficult to view that the defendant was under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the crime of this case that he did not have or lacks the ability to discern things or make decisions; rather, according to the records of this case, the defendant can be recognized to have made a concrete memory of the circumstances leading to the crime of this case and the situation at the time of committing the crime of this case. Thus, it does not appear that the defendant did not have or lacks the ability to discern things at the time of committing the crime of this case.

(3) Even after the above case No. 2003No3883, the defendant asserted mental and physical disorder caused by taking place as a principal offense after being tried several times for the same crime as this case, but such assertion was not accepted). Therefore, the above assertion by the defendant is without merit.

B. Although the Defendant’s judgment on the assertion of unfair sentencing recognizes the instant crime and seriously reflects his mistake, the Defendant also committed the instant crime during the period of repeated crime due to the same crime even though he had been punished several times of punishment due to the same kind of crime.