A. The Defendant had a mental and physical weak condition under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the instant crime.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (one year and two months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the record on the assertion of mental and physical weakness, even though the Defendant was aware of drinking alcohol at the time of committing the instant crime, in view of the background leading up to the instant crime, the means and method of committing the crime, the Defendant’s attitude and words after committing the crime, and the circumstances after committing the crime, etc., the Defendant had the ability to discern things or make decisions under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the instant crime.

It is difficult to see it.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

B. The lower court, in light of the circumstances unfavorable to the Defendant, took into account the fact that the instant crime was committed during the period of repeated crime, despite having had been punished several times due to the same type of crime, and was committed only about two months after release, and considered the favorable circumstances, such as the restoration of damage and the Defendant’s mistake and misunderstanding, and determined the sentence against the Defendant by comprehensively taking into account all the sentencing conditions, including the Defendant’s age, sexual behavior, living environment, and the circumstances after the crime.

The sentencing of the lower court appears to have been conducted within the reasonable scope by fully taking into account the above conditions of the sentencing, and there is no special change in circumstances that make it difficult to assess differently from the sentencing conditions of the lower court up to the trial. Thus, it is not recognized that the lower court’s punishment is unfair because it is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

3. As such, the defendant's appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed under Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is so decided as per Disposition (Article 25 (1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure). However, pursuant to Article 25 (1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure, the defendant's appeal is as follows.