A. In the event that the Defendant, at the time of the instant case, has failed to have the ability to discern things or make decisions by taking excessive and excessive drinking of drugs prescribed by the mental department at the time of the instant case, the lower court, which did not apply mitigation of mental or physical disability, erred by misapprehending the fact and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the records of this case as to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts or mental disability, the defendant used the exemption, etc. prescribed by a mental hospital due to adaptation disorder or non-explosion at the time of the crime of this case, and the fact that he was under the influence of alcohol can be acknowledged. However, in light of the defendant's behavior before and after the crime of this case and the circumstances after the crime of this case, it is not deemed that the defendant had the weak ability to discern things or make decisions at the time of the crime

B. It is deemed that there is a minor damage to the assertion of unfair sentencing, that the defendant compensates for damage after the crime and the victim is not subject to the punishment of the defendant, and that the defendant's health is not good, but has been punished more than 40 times for the same crime since 2001. In particular, on March 13, 2015, the defendant was sentenced to imprisonment for the same kind of crime on December 26, 2015 and was sentenced more than 1 year and 2 months, and the execution of the sentence was completed and constitutes a repeated crime, but the defendant again commits the instant crime with the same content at least 3 months, and all other conditions of sentencing specified in the records of this case, including the defendant's age, character, and conduct, the sentence imposed by the court below is not excessive.

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal by the defendant is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.