A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

2. Determination

A. According to the records of this case as to the assertion of mental disorder or mental retardation, it is recognized that the defendant was in a drunken state at the time of each of the crimes in this case, but in light of various circumstances such as the background, means, and actions before and after each of the crimes in this case, it does not seem that the defendant was in a state of disability or lack of the ability to discern things or make decisions at the time of each of the crimes in this case, and therefore, the defendant's allegation of mental disorder

B. We examine the argument of unfair sentencing, and argue that, during the period of repeated crime due to the same kind of crime, the defendant may have a criminal record of identical violence, and again, during the period of repeated crime due to the same crime, some of the facts charged in the instant case appears to have the habitability of violence, and that the defendant was a state of mental and physical disability under the influence of alcohol. However, considering the fact that the defendant's nature of the crime was poor, such as feling without any particular reason, the defendant should be punished strictly.

However, considering the overall sentencing conditions, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, motive and background of the instant crime, and circumstances after the instant crime, the Defendant’s punishment against the Defendant is somewhat inappropriate, and thus, the Defendant’s assertion of unfair sentencing is justified.

3. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal by the defendant is well-grounded.

Criminal facts

this Court recognizes the substance of the evidence and the summary thereof.