The punishment sentenced by the court below to the defendant (4 months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below as to the allegation of mental disorder as to the grounds for appeal, the defendant was deemed to have a drinking condition at the time of each of the crimes of this case, but in light of the circumstances leading to the crime of this case, the method and method of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the defendant had no or weak ability to discern things or make decisions.

Therefore, we cannot accept the defendant's above assertion.

Although there are circumstances that may be considered in light of the circumstances such as the Defendant’s recognition of the instant crime and the fact that the amount of damage is relatively minor, the Defendant has the history of being punished for the same kind of crime, there are no special circumstances or changes in circumstances that may be newly considered in the sentencing after the sentence of the lower judgment, and other circumstances that are the conditions for sentencing as shown in the records and arguments, such as the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, motive and background of the crime, means and consequence, the circumstances after the crime was committed, etc., the lower court’s sentencing is determined within a reasonable and appropriate scope, and it is not determined that the sentencing is unfair as it is excessively unreasonable.

In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, since there is no ground for appeal by the defendant. It is so decided as per Disposition.