beta
Text
The defendants' appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant A (1) The lower court’s imprisonment (three years and six months of imprisonment) against the Defendant of unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable.
(2) The Defendant was under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the instant crime, and was in a state of mental disability.
B. Defendant B (1) The lower court’s punishment against the Defendant on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing (two years and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
(2) The Defendant was under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the instant crime, and was in a state of mental disability.
2. Determination
A. Although the Defendants asserted the same purport in the lower court’s determination as to the Defendants’ claim of mental disability, the lower court rejected the Defendants’ assertion of mental disability by rendering the following determination in accordance with the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court.
According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court of this case, the defendants could have found that they were drinking at the time of the crime in this case. However, while the defendants discovered the victim while driving a vehicle under drinking, and the defendant Eul led the victim with a deadly weapon, and took a specific action to prevent the victim from being injured, and the defendant A took part in the criminal act to prevent the victim from being injured. The defendants attempted to throw away the knife and the victim used in the criminal act in the course of driving the vehicle immediately after the crime, throw away the clothes suffered at the time of the crime, and throw away the clothes from other clothes. Thus, the defendants cannot be deemed to have lacking the ability to distinguish things or make decisions due to drinking at the time of the crime in this case. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below in light of the records and records, the above judgment of the court below is justified, and it is justified, and it is so decided by the defendants.