A. At the time of each of the instant crimes, the Defendant was in a state of mental disorder or mental disability.

B. The lower court’s sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below, the defendant's assertion of mental disability or mental disability is not found to have been in a state of drinking alcohol at the time of committing the crime in this case, but it does not seem to have been in a state of changing things or lacking the ability to make a decision, and thus, the above assertion by the defendant is not acceptable.

B. In light of the overall sentencing conditions indicated in the records and arguments of this case including the fact that the defendant, who made a judgment on the assertion of unfair sentencing, was sentenced to a suspended sentence due to an act of the same law and was in the period of the suspended sentence, it cannot be deemed that the sentence of the court below against the defendant

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.