The defendant claiming mental disorder was in a state of mental disorder or mental disability due to drinking at the time of each crime against the victim G and H (the judgment of the court below 2013Hun-Ma912).

The lower court’s imprisonment (two months and two years of imprisonment, confiscation) against the Defendant claiming unfair sentencing is too unlimited and unfair.

Judgment

Comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of mental disorder, the defendant was found to have provided a part of alcohol at the time of the crime. Meanwhile, in light of all circumstances such as the process and method of the crime, the defendant's specific behavior before and after the crime, etc., the defendant did not have the ability to discern things or make decisions due to drinking, etc. at the time of the crime.

Since it seems that the defendant's mental and physical disability cannot be seen as being or weak, we cannot accept the defendant's argument.

Although considering the fact that the defendant's mistake in the judgment on the assertion of unfair sentencing is divided, each of the crimes of this case is significant, and the case did not reach an agreement with the victims, and in full view of the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, criminal records, criminal records, circumstances after the crime, etc., the punishment imposed by the court below cannot be deemed to be heavy.

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.