Although the defendant was in a state of mental disorder under the influence of alcohol, the court below neglected this. The court below erred by misunderstanding facts as to mental disorder or by misunderstanding legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

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

Judgment

According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of mental disorder, the defendant was found to have drinking alcohol at the time of the crime, but in light of the background, means and methods of the crime recognized by the record, and all the circumstances after the crime, etc., the defendant had no ability to discern things or make decisions under the influence of alcohol at the time

Until it seems that there was a state or weak, and even if the defendant was unable to control the impulse at that time, the defendant became unable to do so.

Even if considering the criminal records of the defendant, it can not be exempted or mitigated from punishment due to mental and physical disorder because the defendant predicted the danger of the defendant and knew himself.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's argument is without merit (Article 10 (3) of the Criminal Act).

The instant crime against the assertion of unfair sentencing is a so-calledless fraud, and the amount of damage is less than the amount of damage, but there was 30 previous times, including the sentence and the suspended execution, from 1983 to 2013. On June 24, 2013, the Defendant committed the instant crime on May 20, 2014 after having been sentenced to one year to imprisonment with the previous department on the same day and on May 20, 2014; the Defendant did not agree with the victims up to the trial; and the Defendant did not agree with the victims; and the Defendant’s age, character, character, environment, motive, means and consequence of the instant crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc. are considered as being the condition for the sentencing of the instant case, and thus, the sentence of the lower court is unreasonable.

Thus, the defendant's appeal is without merit.