A. At the time of mental disability, the Defendant was in a state of mental disability due to alcohol addiction and shock disorder.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the record of determination as to the claim of mental retardation, the defendant from around May 30, 2015 due to the symptoms of alcohol alcohol and shock disorder, etc.

7. By the time of the instant crime, the Defendant received hospitalized treatment from G Council members by the time of the instant crime, and the Defendant was deemed to have performed drinking at the time of the instant crime, but on the other hand, asserted mental and physical disability in several cases, such as the specific circumstance of the instant crime, the method and method of the crime, the Defendant’s behavior before and after the instant crime, the circumstances after the crime, and the previous larceny cases, but not accepted, it does not seem that the Defendant had had the ability to discern things or make decisions due to the foregoing mental illness at the time.

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

B. Although there are no circumstances to consider the Defendant’s assertion of unfair sentencing as to the assertion of unfair sentencing, such as the fact that the Defendant made a confession of and reflects in depth on the instant crime, the extent of damage, the fact that the damaged goods were entirely returned to the victim, the Defendant suffering from alcohol ozone, etc., and the Defendant’s health conditions are not good, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for larceny on November 10, 2014 at the Government District Court of the Republic of Korea, which was sentenced for 10 months on May 8, 2015, even during the period of repeated offense after the execution of the sentence was completed, and even during the period of repeated offense, it was recognized that the Defendant did not agree with the victim until now, and that the Defendant committed the instant crime under the same Acts during the period of repeated offense, including the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, the background and consequence of the instant crime, and the circumstances after the crime.