A. At the time of the instant crime claiming mental disorder, the Defendant had a mental and physical weakness due to drinking.

B. The sentence that the court below sentenced to the defendant (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. We examine the argument about mental and physical disorder. The defendant was given mental treatment from December 4, 2006 due to a lack of mental capacity, such as a yellow disorder, re-sulve disorder, middle class alcohol ozone force, etc., and the defendant was found to have drinking a considerable amount of alcohol to employees before and after the theft crime of this case. However, the following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, i.e., the defendant was flick with the head of the division and the chief of the office to return home to the restaurant, and if the defendant again thought that he would have seen it well, the head of the office or the chief of the division, or the head of the division, could ask the victim at the time of the crime of this case to leave the restaurant normally, and the defendant was dispatched to the head of the office or the head of the division, but the defendant did not appear to have been given access to the victim's physical and physical condition, such as taking the victim's visit to the restaurant, and the defendant did not appear to have been permitted by the victim.

shall not be deemed to exist.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

B. The fact that the defendant recognized the instant crime and opposed to the determination of the unfair argument of sentencing, and agreed with the victim; and