The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (mental disorder and unreasonable sentencing) was in a state of mental disorder at the time of committing the instant crime, and the sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant (six months of imprisonment) is unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the records of this case as to the assertion of mental disorder, although the defendant was in a drunken state at the time of the crime of this case, in light of various circumstances, such as the background, means, and actions before and after the crime of this case, it cannot be deemed that the defendant was in a state where the defendant lacks the ability to discern things or make decisions at the time of the crime of this case, and thus, the defendant's mental and physical disorder assertion

B. We examine the judgment on the assertion of unfair sentencing, and consider the following: (a) the Defendant committed the instant crime of the same kind once again in two months after having been sentenced to the suspension of the execution of imprisonment for the same kind of crime; (b) the Defendant’s motive and background leading up to the instant crime and expressed decentralization to the government office while displaying violence, there is a need for the Defendant to have the risk of recidivism isolated from society in high risk of recidivism and have anti-defluence and correction time; and (c) the victim did not recover from damage. However, the Defendant’s confession of the instant crime is against his mistake. However, the Defendant’s confession of the instant crime should reflect his punishment when the sentence becomes final and conclusive; and (d) the Defendant’s punishment should be invalidated at the time of the original trial and the suspended sentence becomes final and conclusive; and (e) comprehensively taking account of all the sentencing conditions indicated in the record of the instant case, such as the Defendant’s age, pre-trial, environment, motive and background of the instant crime, and the circumstances before and after the instant crime, the Defendant’s argument is reasonable.

3. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is reasonable.