A. At the time of committing the instant crime, the Defendant was in a state of mental disorder or mental disability.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, it may be recognized that the defendant was diagnosed as alcohol addiction and was under drinking at the time of the crime of this case. However, the defendant did not seem to have been under the mental or physical condition at the time of the crime of this case. Thus, the above argument by the defendant is without merit.

B. In full view of all the sentencing conditions indicated in the records and arguments of the instant case of unfair sentencing and the fact that the Defendant had the same criminal records, the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable because it is too unreasonable.

[In light of the above, four months of imprisonment with prison labor sentenced by the court below is illegal since it exceeds the minimum limit of the applicable sentences under the law against the defendant. However, in this case where only the defendant appealeds against the defendant, the defendant cannot be sentenced more disadvantageous than the court below in accordance with the principle of prohibition of disadvantageous alteration provided for in Article 368 of the Criminal Procedure Act, so the defendant cannot be sentenced more disadvantageous than the court below's judgment. Thus, the defendant's appeal is without merit. Thus, it is dismissed in accordance with Article 3