A. In the event of each of the instant crimes, the Defendant was in a state of mental disability or mental disability under the influence of alcohol.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In light of the circumstance leading up to each of the crimes in this case, the means and method of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., it does not seem that the defendant had the ability to discern things or make decisions due to drinking at the time of each of the crimes in this case. Thus, the above argument by the defendant is without merit.

B. Although there are favorable circumstances for the defendant to the judgment on the assertion of unfair sentencing, such as the fact that the defendant acknowledges and reflects each of the crimes in this case, the victims do not want the punishment against the defendant, the defendant has been punished at least 30 times as the same crime, and the defendant also seems to have committed each of the crimes in this case during the period of repeated crime, and the victim's degree of injury is not easy, in addition to the circumstances unfavorable to the defendant, there is no change of circumstances that can mitigate the sentence of the court below at the trial, and considering all other factors of sentencing as shown in the records and arguments, such as the defendant's age, character, character and behavior, environment, family relationship, motive and circumstance of the crime, means and consequence of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc., the court below's punishment is judged to be appropriate, and it is not recognized that the defendant's above assertion is unreasonable because it is not reasonable.

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.