A. At the time of committing the instant crime, the Defendant was in a state of mental and physical loss or mental weakness due to mental illness.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant received medical treatment for mental illness at the time of the instant crime.

There is no evidence to view that there was no or weak ability to discern things or make decisions due to mental illness, etc. at the time of the instant crime in light of all the circumstances such as the background, means and methods of the instant crime, and the Defendant’s act before and after the instant crime.

It is not visible.

Therefore, the defendant's mental disorder is without merit.

B. Although there are favorable circumstances such as the Defendant’s confession of the instant crime, and the fact that the amount of damage is not significant, the Defendant committed the instant crime on the other hand, on the other hand, the crime of this case is not deemed to be a crime committed by the Defendant due to a theft of money and valuables, etc. by damaging the structure of the elderly administration, etc. several times from around November 2015 to August 2016. The Defendant had the record of criminal punishment three times for the same crime; the Defendant did not agree with the victims up to the first instance trial; and the amount acquired by the instant crime appears to have no possibility of recovering from damage caused by the consumption due to living expenses, entertainment expenses, etc.; there is no special circumstance or change of circumstances to be newly considered after the sentence of the lower judgment; the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive, means and consequence of the instant crime, and all the changes in the sentencing records and all the changes in the sentencing mentioned in the instant case, such as the record and the circumstances after the instant crime, cannot be deemed to be unfair.

Therefore, the defendant's improper assertion of sentencing is without merit.

3. Thus, the defendant's appeal is without merit and Article 364 of the Criminal Procedure Act is not reasonable.