A. At the time of committing the instant crime, the Defendant was in a state of mental or physical weakness or loss of mind and body.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (the amount of KRW 3 million) is excessively unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the grounds for appeal

A. According to the records on the assertion of mental and physical disorder, even though the defendant was in a drunken state at the time of the crime of this case, considering the background of the crime of this case, the method of the crime, the defendant's behavior before and after the crime of this case, etc., it cannot be deemed that the defendant did not have or lacks the ability to discern things or make decisions.

Therefore, the defendant's mental disorder cannot be accepted.

B. It is desirable to refrain from rendering a judgment of the first instance court by destroying the judgment of the first instance court solely on the ground that the sentencing of the first instance does not change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court’s determination on the unfair argument of sentencing, and that the sentencing of the first instance does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, while the sentence of the first instance is within the reasonable scope of discretion, even though the sentence of the first instance falls within the reasonable scope of discretion, it is desirable to refrain from rendering a sentence that does not differ from the appellate court’s view (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). In light of the foregoing legal doctrine, in light of the foregoing, the lower court determined a punishment within a reasonable scope by sufficiently considering the overall circumstances concerning the sentencing of the Defendant, and there is no change in the conditions of sentencing when compared with the lower court’s judgment as there is no reason to newly consider in the first instance

Therefore, the defendant's improper assertion of sentencing cannot be accepted.

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