A. The Defendant, who has lost his mind and body or has committed the instant crime under the condition of mental and physical loss or mental weakness.

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

2. Determination

A. According to the records on the assertion of mental and physical loss or mental weakness, even though the defendant was in a drunken state at the time of the crime of this case, considering the circumstances, process of the crime, the defendant's behavior before and after the crime of this case, etc., it cannot be deemed that the defendant lost his ability or decision-making ability to discern things or did not reach a weak state. Thus, this part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.

B. In full view of the circumstances that the lower court rendered on the grounds of sentencing and all the sentencing conditions shown in the records and arguments of this case, the sentence imposed by the Defendant is deemed appropriate, and thus, cannot be deemed unfair because it is too unreasonable, and there are no other special circumstances to change the above sentence. Thus, this part of the Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

3. As such, the Defendant’s appeal is dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition (Article 2(3) of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act on the Punishment of Violences, etc.). However, “Article 2(2)3 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act” is obvious that it is a clerical error in Article 2(2)3 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, and thus, it is ex officio correction in accordance with Article 25(1) of the Rules on the Criminal Procedure.