A. The Defendant with mental disorder was in a state of weak ability to discern things or make decisions through drinking alcohol at the time of committing the instant crime, but the lower court’s failure to recognize the Defendant’s mental disorder is unlawful.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant (a fine of four million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court regarding the assertion of mental disorder, it is recognized that the Defendant had a drinking condition at the time of the instant crime, but in light of various circumstances, such as the background, process, means and method of the instant crime, and the Defendant’s speech and behavior before and after the instant crime, it does not seem that the Defendant had a weak ability to discern things or make decisions due to drinking.

B. Considering the various sentencing conditions indicated in the instant argument, such as the motive and method of the instant crime, the circumstances after the instant crime, etc., the lower court’s sentence is not deemed unreasonable.

3. As such, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit.

(However, pursuant to Article 25 (1) of the Regulation on Criminal Procedure, each part of the "suspect interrogation protocol" stated in the three, five, and six lines in the criminal facts column of the judgment of the court below ex officio shall be corrected to each "suspect interrogation protocol".