A. At the time of committing the crime, he was physically and mentally deprived or physically weak at the time of committing the crime.

B. The sentence of the lower court (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of mental disorder, it is recognized that the Defendant had drinking alcohol at the time of the instant crime.

However, in full view of the circumstances of the crime, the means and method of the crime, the behavior of the defendant before and after the crime, the circumstances after the crime, etc., there was no or weak ability to discern things or make decisions.

shall not be deemed to exist.

B. It is recognized that the defendant recognizes the crime and reflects on the wrongful argument of sentencing.

On the other hand, the defendant has been punished for the same crime.

The nine days after having been sentenced to imprisonment for the same crime, and the same crime has been committed again.

There was no agreement with the victims.

In full view of the above circumstances, Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive, means, and consequence of the crime, various sentencing conditions shown in the instant pleadings, such as the circumstances after the crime was committed, it is difficult to view that the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable.

3. The appeal by the defendant is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal by the defendant is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.