The judgment below

Part of the medical treatment and custody application case shall be reversed.

The claim for medical treatment and custody of this case is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence (eight months of imprisonment) sentenced by the court below on the part of the defendant's case and the candidate for medical treatment and custody (hereinafter "defendant") is too unreasonable.

B. As to the part of the medical treatment and custody claim case, it is difficult to deem that the need for medical treatment at the medical treatment and custody facility or the risk of recidivism exists in light of the following: (a) the Defendant was given a mental counseling or hospitalized at a hospital with respect to alcohol identification after the instant crime; (b) the Defendant relied on the influence of alcohol in order to resolve influence; and (c) the Defendant was able to refrain from re-offending with restraint on drinking in the future.

2. Determination

A. As to the part of the defendant's case, the crime of this case interferes with the restaurant business by ordering alcohol and food, refusing to pay the price, and neglecting to do so, even though the defendant did not have the ability or intent to pay the price.

The lower court, under the circumstances that the Defendant committed each of the instant crimes during the period of repeated offense and committed a serious same criminal offense, took into account the fact that the amount of damage is not large and the victim does not want the punishment of the Defendant, and that the Defendant committed a crime and misunderstandings, and determined the sentence against the Defendant in consideration of the recommended sentencing guidelines of the Supreme Court Sentencing Committee.

The sentencing of the lower court appears to have been determined appropriately by fully taking into account the above various circumstances, and there is no special change in circumstances that may be assessed differently from the sentencing conditions of the lower court until the trial is in fact.

In full view of all the sentencing conditions indicated in the instant case, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, the sentence imposed by the lower court is too excessive.