A. At the time of committing the instant crime, the Defendant, a mentally and physically weak, was in a state of mental and physical weakness.

B. The lower court’s sentence (6 months of imprisonment) against an unjust defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court regarding the assertion of mental and physical weakness, it can be recognized that the Defendant had drinking alcohol at the time of committing the instant crime.

However, in full view of the following circumstances revealed by the above evidence, namely, ① the Defendant was going up to the second floor, which was the place where the Defendant committed the instant crime by using stairs; ② the victim’s door was behind the bank, and then stolen the victim’s door; ③ the Defendant’s physical clothes, which appear to be unnecessary among the stolen goods after the commission of the instant crime, was laid down in the front door of the housing unit; the details of the instant crime; and the Defendant’s behavior before and after the commission of the instant crime, it cannot be seen that the Defendant did not have a weak ability to discern things or make decisions due to drinking at the time of the instant crime.

Therefore, the defendant's mental and physical weak argument is without merit.

B. Circumstances that may be considered favorable to the Defendant, such as the fact that all of the instant crimes were recognized and considered in depth to be reflected in the determination of the illegality of sentencing, the fact that a person appears to have committed a contingent crime while under the influence of alcohol, and the fact that the value of the stolen product is a small amount, etc.

However, even if the defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of imprisonment for the same crime, he/she shall be severely punished for committing the crime of this case without being able to do so during the grace period.

As the victim was unable to reach an agreement with the victim, the victim is punished for the defendant.

In light of the fact that the defendant had access to various buildings before and after the crime of this case, and that the female victim committed the crime of this case by entering the room where the female victim was married.