A. Each of the crimes of this case committed by a mental or physical disability is committed in a state of mental or physical disability due to the Defendant's taking advantage of friendly symptoms and anti-sulfur disorder treatment drugs.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (three years and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence submitted as to the assertion of mental disability, it is recognized that the Defendant received medical treatment from a medical clinic of Ma mental health from September 1, 2008 to January 23, 2015 as “other re-reflexive depression, other physical disability, and other disability of water surface,” but in light of various circumstances, such as the motive for each of the crimes of this case, the circumstances and attitudes of the crime, the conduct of the Defendant before and after the crime, the existence and degree of memory of the situation before and after the crime, and the attitude in the investigation and the trial proceedings, etc., it is not deemed that the Defendant had the ability to discern things or make decisions at the time of each of the crimes of this case.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

B. The instant crime on the assertion of unfair sentencing is an unfavorable circumstance to the Defendant, such as: (a) the Defendant deceivings the victim C to obtain pecuniary benefits by deceiving the victim C; (b) took money by making his head a news block; (c) the Defendant escaped without any rescue and relief measures despite having caused a traffic accident while driving a motor vehicle without a driver’s license; (d) the Defendant again committed the same kind of crime with the history of having been punished five times for the violation of the Road Traffic Act (unlicensed Driving) and one time for the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes; and (e) the crime of injury by robbery requires strict punishment in light of the applicable law and the age of the victim, etc.

On the other hand, however, the defendant recognizes all crimes, the degree of damage is not severe, and the victim wishes to punish the defendant by mutual consent with the victims.