A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

A. At the time of each of the crimes stated in the judgment below Nos. 1 and 2, the Defendant was in a state of lacking the ability to discern things or make decisions.

B. The sentencing of the lower court (No. 1: imprisonment with prison labor for 4 months and 2 months: imprisonment with prison labor for 10 months) is too unreasonable even if it is not so unreasonable.

Judgment

A. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant ex officio, the court below sentenced each of the above judgments to the defendant, and the defendant filed an appeal against each of the above judgments, and this court decided to consolidate the above two appeals cases. Each of the crimes of the court below 1 and 2 against the defendant should be sentenced to a single sentence within the scope of the term of punishment increased by concurrent crimes under Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act in relation to concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act. In this regard, the judgment of the court below against the defendant cannot escape from all of the reversal.

B. Determination as to the claim of mental suffering from mental illness, however, since the above argument of the defendant is still subject to the judgment of the court of this case, it is acknowledged that the defendant was in a state of drinking at the time of each of the crimes of this case, but in light of the circumstances leading to each of the crimes of this case, the defendant's attitude before and after the crime of this case, and the behavior of the defendant, it is not deemed that the defendant had a state of weak ability to discern things or make decisions at the time of each of the crimes of this case, and therefore, this part

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, and it is again decided as follows.