A. The Defendant had no or weak ability to discern things or make decisions under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing rape as stated in the lower judgment.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the evidence duly admitted and examined, the lower court’s determination on the assertion of mental and physical disorder may recognize the fact that the Defendant had a drinking condition at the time of committing rape as indicated in the judgment below. However, in light of various circumstances such as the circumstances of each of the above crimes, the method and method thereof, etc., it is difficult to deem that the Defendant had no or weak ability to discern things under the influence of alcohol to make a decision.

B. Although the Defendant agreed with the victim of each rape in the lower court’s judgment on the assertion of unfair sentencing, there were circumstances against the mistake, the nature of the crime is very poor, such as rape, and the damage to the crime of fraud has not been recovered once more than four times. In full view of all the sentencing conditions indicated in the arguments, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, the lower court’s punishment cannot be deemed to be excessively unreasonable.

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the conclusion is groundless.