A. Even though it is difficult to see that the Defendant was in a state of mental disability at the time of stopping the instant crime, it is unreasonable for the lower court to recognize it and reduce the punishment.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (three years of imprisonment, four years of suspended execution, etc.) is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The issue of a mental disorder caused by drinking a judgment on the assertion related to mental disorder is without merit and without necessarily based on the appraisal by a specialized doctor, after considering all the materials indicated in the record and the statement of the defendant in the court.

(2) According to the court below's statement at the trial court of the witness G and the CCTV image taken by the defendant before and after the crime of this case, the defendant 1 was found to have knife or movement while going in the front and after the crime of this case, and the following circumstances acknowledged by evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, i.e., the defendant was unable to properly memory the specific contents of the crime of this case and the situation before and after the crime of this case (in the first police record, 52-54 pages), and in the court of the court below, the defendant stated that "the amount of ordinary liquor was 4-5 soldiers at the time of the crime of this case" (2) the witness G's statement at the trial court of the court below and the CCTV image taken by the defendant before and after the crime of this case.

Therefore, this part of the prosecutor's argument is without merit.

B. The sentencing on the assertion of unfair sentencing is based on the statutory penalty, and the sentencing conditions under Article 51 of the Criminal Act are equally considered.