A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

A. Although the Defendant was unable or weak to discern things or make decisions under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the instant crime, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on mental and physical disorder, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

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

2. Determination

A. In light of the background, process, means and method of the instant crime, the Defendant’s behavior before and after the instant crime was committed, etc. as revealed in the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, it is deemed that the Defendant was aware of drinking at the time of the instant crime, but it does not seem that the Defendant did not have the ability to discern things or make decisions, and thus, the above assertion by the Defendant is rejected.

B. (1) Where the judgment of the court of first instance was rendered and a final and conclusive judgment should be rendered pursuant to Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act, among concurrent crimes provided for in the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act before the judgment of the court of first instance was rendered, the appellate court shall ex officio reverse the judgment of the court of

(See Supreme Court Decision 2010Do15253 Decided January 13, 2011, etc.). According to the Sheet record, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of one year for a crime of violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act in the Sungwon District Court’s Sung-nam Branch on March 27, 2014. The Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years for a year, and the fact that the judgment became final and conclusive on April 4, 2014, which was subsequent to the pronouncement of the lower judgment.

Thus, the crime of this case is in the concurrent relationship between the crime subject to the above final judgment and the crime subject to the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act. Thus, the court below ex officio reverses the judgment of the court below and determines the punishment in consideration of equity in the case of concurrent judgment pursuant to Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act. Therefore, the judgment of the court below