All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

, however, for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. At the time of each of the crimes stated in the judgment of the first and second court, the Defendant was in a state of mental disability or mental health disorder under the influence of alcohol.

B. Each sentence sentenced by the court below (the first sentence of a fine of 2 million won: the second sentence of a fine of 2 million won: imprisonment with prison labor of 4 months and the third sentence of a fine of 700,000 won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant's ex officio due to the consolidation, the case of appeal by the first instance court against the second instance judgment, the case of appeal by the second instance court against the second instance judgment, and the case of appeal by the third instance court against the third instance judgment, which is the case of appeal by this court against the second instance judgment, was joined in the proceedings of the first instance court. The first and the second instance court's offenses against the defendant are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and shall be sentenced to a single sentence within the term of punishment subject to aggravated concurrent crimes under Article 38 (1) of the Criminal Act. In this regard, the judgment of the court below cannot be exempted from all reversal.

However, despite such reasons for ex officio destruction, the defendant's argument about mental and physical disorder is still subject to a trial at the trial at the court, and this will be examined below.

B. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of mental disorder, it is recognized that the defendant was drunk at the time of each crime in the judgment of the court below, but in light of the various circumstances such as the defendant's behavior before and after the crime in this case, the defendant did not have the ability to discern things or make decisions due to drinking.

Since it cannot be seen that it has reached a state or weak, this part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.

3. If so, the judgment of the court below on the ground of ex officio reversal as above, without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act.