As long as only the defendant appealed against such judgment of the court below on the grounds of mental disability and unreasonable sentencing, the dismissal of the public prosecution on the grounds of the judgment of the court below shall be deemed to have been exempted from the public defense subject to the public defense among the parties, and the scope of the judgment of the court below is limited to the conviction part of the court

Therefore, the part of the facts charged in the instant case (including the relation to the obstruction of business with the obstruction of business) is not judged separately in the trial.

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Under the influence of alcohol at the time of the instant crime, the Defendant was in a state of mental disability.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (five months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

3. In light of the Defendant’s speech and behavior or the circumstances before and after the crime of this case acknowledged by the record of judgment on the claim of mental retardation, it does not seem that the Defendant had the weak ability to discern things and make decisions at the time.

Therefore, the defendant's argument of mental disability is not accepted.

4. Although the victim did not want the punishment of the defendant, the crime of this case does not seem to have been committed by the defendant without any reason, and thus, the nature of the crime is not good. In light of the content or attitude of the defendant's statement made at an investigative agency immediately after the crime of this case, there is a doubt as to whether the defendant's mistake is against his own wrong by petition, the defendant again commits the crime of this case during the repeated crime period, which is before the lapse of one month after the execution of imprisonment for the same crime, and the defendant is subject to criminal punishment more than 20 times.