A. At the time of committing the instant crime, the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol and was in a state of mental disorder.

B. The sentence imposed by the court below against the defendant (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of mental disorder, although the defendant was deemed to have drank a considerable amount of alcohol at the time of the crime of this case, considering the degree of drinking and the attitude and behavior before and after the crime of this case, the defendant was unable to discern things or make decisions under the influence of alcohol at the time of the crime of this case.

Therefore, this part of the Defendant’s assertion is difficult to accept.

3. In full view of the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant’s recognition of and reflects on the allegation of unfair sentencing regarding the instant crime; (b) the point that the Defendant agreed with the victim G is favorable; (c) the Defendant has been punished several times for the same kind of crime; (d) the Defendant committed the instant crime after having been sentenced to a punishment for the same kind of crime; and (e) the rest of the victims did not agree with the other victims; and (e) there is no change in the circumstances or circumstances that may be newly considered after the sentence of the lower judgment; and (e) other circumstances, including the Defendant’s character and conduct, environment, relationship to victims, motive, means and consequence of the instant crime; and (e) the circumstances after

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit.

4. 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.