A. Under the influence of alcohol at the time of the instant crime, the Defendant was in a state with weak capacity to discern things or make decisions.

B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (two years and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the judgment on mental and physical disability claim, according to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, it is difficult to view that the defendant was found to have been a de facto state at the time of committing the crime of this case, but it is difficult to view that the defendant has lost the ability to discern things or make decisions, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this differently,

B. In light of various sentencing conditions indicated in the records and pleadings, the lower court’s sentence is too unreasonable even if considering the circumstances asserted by the Defendant as the grounds for appeal, such as the following: (a) the Defendant’s decision on the allegation of unfair sentencing was examined; and (b) the Defendant was found to have committed the instant facts charged, and the victim’s injury incurred by the instant crime was very serious; and (c) the Defendant’s efforts to recover damage was not possible.

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