A. The Defendant, at the time of committing the instant crime, was physically and mentally weak due to the existence of alcohol, disorder in impulse adjustment, etc., but the lower court neglected this.

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

2. Determination

A. In full view of the background, means and methods of the instant crime, the Defendant’s act before and after the instant crime, and the circumstances after the instant crime, etc. acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, it cannot be deemed that the Defendant did not have a weak ability to discern things or make decisions due to mental illness, such as alcohol existence, etc., at the time of the instant crime.

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

B. Even if the Defendant considered the circumstances favorable to the Defendant on the grounds of this part of the appeal, the lower court appears to have determined the sentence within a reasonable scope, taking full account of the overall circumstances regarding the sentencing.

B. There are no special circumstances or changes in circumstances to change the sentencing of the lower court after the lower judgment.

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

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.