2. In full view of all the circumstances, such as the motive, background, means and method of the instant crime indicated in the record, the Defendant’s act before and after the instant crime, and the circumstances after the instant crime, prior to the determination, the Defendant did not have the ability to discern things or make decisions under the influence of alcohol at the time of the instant crime.

Therefore, this part of the argument is without merit, since it cannot be seen as having reached a state of or weakness.

Next, regarding the assertion of unfair sentencing, the lower court appears to have determined the penalty by reducing the fine amount (two million won of a fine) of the summary order against the Defendant by taking account of all the circumstances already, and the Defendant had the record of obstructing the victim’s restaurant business and having been sentenced to a fine twice prior to the crime of this case, and taking into account the following factors: the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive and circumstance of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc., as well as various sentencing conditions indicated in the records and arguments of this case, such as the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, environment, motive and circumstance of the crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable

3. As such, the defendant's appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed under Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.