The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant with mental disorder committed an unlawful act that affected the conclusion of the judgment by neglecting the judgment of the court below although he had the mental disorder under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the instant crime.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing (1.5 million won of a fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the Defendant ex officio, the Defendant was sentenced on December 21, 2012 by the Seoul High Court to imprisonment with prison labor and one year and six months for attempted murder, etc. on February 28, 2013, and the judgment became final and conclusive on February 28, 2013. As such, the crime of attempted murder, etc., for which judgment became final and conclusive, is in a concurrent relationship under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and the punishment of this case is determined after considering equity in cases where judgment is concurrently rendered in accordance with Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act and examining whether to reduce or exempt the sentence. Thus, the lower judgment which failed to take

However, despite the above reasons for ex officio reversal, the defendant's mental and physical disability argument is still subject to the judgment of this court, and the following is examined.

B. We examine the argument about mental disorder. According to the record, it is recognized that the defendant had a drinking condition at the time of the crime of injury of this case, but in light of the circumstances indicated in the records, such as the background of the crime in this part and the defendant's act before and after the crime, the defendant lacks the ability to discern things and make decisions at the time of the crime of this case.

This part of the defendant's assertion is without merit, since it is not recognized to have reached the above status of absence of such ability.

3. Accordingly, the defendant's mental and physical disability is without merit, but on the other hand, the court below's decision on the defendant's allegation of unfair sentencing is without merit.