A. Defendant 1) The Defendant was in a state of mental disorder under the influence of alcohol at the time of the instant crime. (2) The lower court’s sentence of unfair sentencing (two years and six months of imprisonment, and orders to complete sexual assault treatment programs) is too unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor 1) The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing is unreasonable as it is too unfasible and unfair. 2) Although there are no special circumstances that may not disclose or notify the personal information of the Defendant, it is unreasonable for the lower court to impose an order to disclose or notify the Defendant’s personal information.

2. Determination

A. According to the records on the Defendant’s assertion of mental and physical disorder, although there are circumstances that the Defendant deemed to have drinking at the time of the instant crime, even so, in light of the following: (a) the background and process leading up to the instant crime; (b) the means and method of the crime; (c) the Defendant’s behavior before and after the instant crime; and (d) the Defendant’s attitude and content in the investigative agency, the Defendant lost the ability

It does not seem that such ability has been in a weak state.

In addition, Article 20 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes provides that “When a sexual crime is committed in the state of mental disorder caused by drinking or drugs, Article 10(1) and (2) of the Criminal Act may not apply.” As such, it is not appropriate to apply Article 10(1) and (2) of the Criminal Act to the instant crime, which is a sexual crime, on the ground of a temporary drinking state

Therefore, the judgment of the court below rejecting the defendant's mental and physical disorder is just and acceptable, and there is no error as alleged by the defendant, so this part of the defendant's appeal is without merit.

B. The Defendant and the prosecutor’s assertion of unfair sentencing.