A. At the time of the instant case, the Defendant was in a state of mental and physical loss or mental weakness by drinking alcohol.

B. The sentence sentenced by the court below to the defendant (one year of imprisonment, etc.) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In light of the background and method of the instant crime, the Defendant’s act before and after the instant crime, and the Defendant’s statement made by an investigative agency, etc. acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court as to the assertion of mental and physical disorder, the Defendant had lost or weak ability to discern things or make decisions by force at the time of the instant crime.

shall not be deemed to exist.

We do not accept this part of the defendant's assertion.

Even if the Defendant was in a mental and physical state under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing each of the instant crimes

In light of the fact that even before the instant case, the Defendant had been punished by committing a crime under the influence of alcohol several times, the Defendant is deemed to have predicted his behavior, which is likely to commit a crime at the time of drinking, in advance, and has been in a state of mental and physical weakness.

Each of the instant crimes constitutes the so-called “free act in the cause” under Article 10(3) of the Criminal Act and cannot be recognized as having mental and physical weakness.

B. The circumstances favorable to the determination of unfair sentencing - the Defendant recognized and reflected the instant crime.

- The defendant does not want to punish the above victim under the agreement with the victim of the crime of destroying property.

- The crime of cutting explosive substances was committed on the attempted charge.

Unfavorable circumstances - The Defendant, on the grounds of a relatively minor reason, destroyed the glass of another’s residence, destroyed explosive objects such as butane gas, and threatened police officers with a deadly weapon.

Criminal quality is very bad.

- The Defendant does not know even during the period of repeated crimes.