All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) The Defendant, misunderstanding the legal doctrine on mental and physical weakness, ought to be mitigated inasmuch as he was under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing each of the instant crimes.

2) The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below against the defendant is too unfortunate and unfair.

2. Determination

A. As to the Defendant’s assertion of misunderstanding of the legal principles on the Defendant’s mental and physical weakness, the mental and physical disorder provided for in Article 10 of the Criminal Act requires that the Defendant had mental disorder, such as mental illness or abnormal mental condition, and the mental disorder caused by such mental disorder, lack or decrease in the ability to discern things or control actions accordingly. Thus, even if a person with mental disorder is a person with a normal mental disorder, if he/she had the ability to distinguish things from others at the time of committing the crime, he/she cannot be deemed a mental and physical disorder (see Supreme Court Decision 92Do1425, Aug. 18, 192, 192, etc.). According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, the fact that the Defendant

However, the following circumstances acknowledged by the above evidence, that is, the defendant did not memory under the influence of alcohol in the investigative agency with respect to each of the crimes of this case.

On the other hand, the crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes of this case was committed, on the ground that "the victim D was investigated by the investigative agency upon the victim D's report, and the victim D was able to see the victim D, and there was no fact that the victim D et al. conspiredd his photograph as if the victim D et al. was her own will." As to the crime of interference with the business of this case and violence, "the blance and the card were put to the restaurant of victim H for a considerable period of time", and the blance value was too unbured to the victim H during the crime of interference with the business of this case.