beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
Summary of Grounds for Appeal
Of each of the crimes in this case, the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol to avoid the crime of injury to the victim C and the insult of the victim E, and the Defendant had weak ability to discern things and make decisions.
Considering the fact that the defendant is living in good faith and reflects his mistake, the punishment imposed by the court below (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
Judgment
According to the records of this case as to the claim of mental disability, it is recognized that the defendant assaulted the victim C and abused the victim E, but in light of various circumstances such as the circumstances of each of the above crimes, means, and actions before and after the crime, it is not deemed that the defendant had the ability to discern things or make decisions at the time of each of the above crimes, and therefore, the defendant's assertion of mental and physical disability is without merit.
The judgment on the assertion of unfair sentencing is based on the following facts: although the defendant is deemed to have committed a single offense, the defendant is deemed to have been punished several times as the same offense; the defendant was sentenced to imprisonment for a period of eight months in the Seoul Western District Court on April 27, 2012 to a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a deadly weapon, etc.), and the defendant again committed each of the crimes of this case without being aware of it during the suspended execution period of two years in the Seoul Western District Court on April 27, 2012; and the victim E, I, and G are not agreed upon until the trial; the motive and means of each of the crimes of this case; the result; the circumstances after the crime; and the various sentencing conditions appearing in the records and arguments of this case, the defendant's punishment against the defendant is too unreasonable. Thus, the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit.
In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is justified.