A. At the time of committing the instant crime, the Defendant was in a state of mental disorder or mental disability with mental disorder.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unreasonable sentencing (the fine of 4 million won) is too heavy.

2. Determination

A. According to the record as to the assertion of mental disorder, even though the defendant was found to have a drinking condition at the time of the crime of this case, in light of the amount of the defendant's usual drinking, the background leading up to the crime, the means and method of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the defendant did not have the ability to discern things or make decisions due to drinking at the time of the crime.

Since it seems that the defendant was in a state or weak condition, the above argument by the defendant is without merit.

B. As to the assertion of unreasonable sentencing, the Defendant’s confessions and reflects all the instant crimes, and the fact that the Defendant appears to have reached an contingent crime under the influence of alcohol is an element of sentencing favorable to the Defendant.

However, the fact that the defendant was unable to agree with the victims, and the crime of this case was committed while the defendant was sentenced to the suspension of the execution of imprisonment for the crime of this case, and that the defendant had the record of punishment 17 times prior to the crime of this case is an unfavorable sentencing factor against the defendant.

In addition, considering the overall sentencing conditions stipulated by Article 51 of the Criminal Act, such as the defendant's age, character and conduct, family relationship, etc., the sentence of the court below is too unreasonable.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.