A. The Defendant did not insult the victim due to the same abusiveism as written in the facts charged.

The Defendant did not want the victim to do so, and the Defendant’s conduct, not the Defendant, was sled up with the salted fish, and the card settlement machine was debrised by the Defendant, so it does not constitute the crime of interference with business.

B. The Defendant committed each of the instant crimes in a state of mental disorder or mental disability under the influence of alcohol.

C. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances acknowledged by the court below's legitimately adopted and investigated evidence of the assertion of mistake of facts, namely, ① the victim has consistently stated that she would have caused a sense of shame and sense of shame as stated in the facts charged. The witness's statement that the Defendant took a bath to the victim also corresponds to the statement of the above victim. ② According to CCTV dynamic image in which the crime was taken, it can be seen that the Defendant's daily practice was set up with a hand that caused the salted fish. However, the Defendant also tried to spoke up the table and spoke, using the salted fish, and intentionally spoke up the card settlement system by using it. Thus, it can be sufficiently recognized by the evidence submitted by the prosecutor that the Defendant committed each crime as stated in the facts charged.

This part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.

B. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court as to the allegation of mental or physical disability, the Defendant is deemed to have served alcohol at the time of the instant crime, but in light of the background leading up to the instant crime, the means and method of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the judgment at the time of the instant crime.