A. At the time of night-time theft, the Defendant was in a state of mental disability with weak capacity to discern things or make decisions due to shock caused by the death of his father.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the grounds that the sentence of unfair sentencing (one year and four months of imprisonment, confiscation, and surcharge 200,000 won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the record on the assertion of mental disorder, in light of the Defendant’s method of crime, the situation before and after the commission of the crime, etc., it does not seem that the Defendant did not have reached a state where he had the ability to discern things or make decisions at the time of night structure theft.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's argument is without merit.

B. The Korean Criminal Procedure Act, which adopts the trial-oriented principle and the principle of directness on the assertion of unfair sentencing, ought to respect the determination of sentencing in cases where there exists no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the first instance court’s sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). Based on the foregoing legal doctrine, comprehensively taking into account the records and arguments, the sentence imposed by the lower court appears to have been appropriately determined by fully taking account of all circumstances, including various sentencing grounds asserted by the Defendant, and no special circumstance exists to the extent that the sentence of the lower court would change.

This part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.