The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact-finding, the Defendant does not shoulder a lid from a navigational lid by partially taking part of the lids, and in the process of exceeding a lid from a navigational lid, which is set under a rail in excess of a rail, through a one-way lid, and thus, there is no intention to destroy and damage property.

B. The Defendant was under the influence of alcohol at the time of each of the instant crimes, and thus was in a state of mental disability.

C. The sentence imposed by the lower court (five months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the evidence duly examined and adopted by the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts, the defendant can be found to have broken the victim's resistance lids in the process of going beyond the second floor stairs of his residence and directly attached to the victim's residence. The defendant's intrusion upon the victim's residence in order to resist noise coming from the victim's residence, the defendant's intrusion upon the victim's dwelling, the fact that the defendant started the lids due to the plaintiff's navigational navigational navigational navigational navigational navigational navigational navigational navigational navigational navigational navigational navigational navigational navigational navigational navigational navigational navigational navigational navigational navigations, and the defendant's weight, and thus, the defendant's allegation in this part is without merit.

B. According to the records of this case as to the claim of mental disability, even though the defendant was in a state of drinking at the time of each of the crimes in this case, in light of the following circumstances, such as the course, process, means and method of the crime in this case, and the defendant's speech and behavior before and after the crime in this case, it does not seem that the defendant was in a state of lacking the ability to discern things or make decisions, and therefore, this part of the defendant's assertion

C. We can consider the favorable circumstances that the Defendant’s decision on the allegation of unfair sentencing was smoothly agreed with the victim.

However, there is a criminal history that the defendant has been punished for the same type of crime.