The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. At the time of the instant crime, the Defendant was drunk and was in a state of mental disability.

B. The sentence of unfair sentencing (two years and six months of imprisonment) by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination:

A. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below as to the claim of mental disability, the defendant is deemed to have been under the influence of alcohol at the time of the crime of this case, but it does not seem to have reached the state of mental disability and injury, so the above argument by the defendant is without merit.

B. In light of the fact that the Defendant had been sentenced to larceny on three occasions, and in particular, on August 22, 201, sentenced eight months to imprisonment with prison labor at the Seoul Southern District Court for larceny on April 14, 2012, the Defendant committed the instant crime during the period of repeated crime due to a previous conviction, which completed the execution of the said sentence, and the fact that the excessive amount of the victim’s timber toward the part of the victim and the method of committing the instant crime is not somewhat weak, it is necessary to punish the Defendant.

However, in full view of the following factors: (a) the Defendant led to the confession of the instant crime while committing the instant crime; (b) the Defendant appears to have committed a contingent crime; (c) the amount of damage therefrom does not reach the maximum amount; (d) the Defendant immediately appeared in the district zone after committing the instant crime; and (e) the victim does not want to be punished against the Defendant; and (e) other various sentencing conditions indicated in the instant pleadings, such as the Defendant’s age, career, environment, character and conduct, motive, circumstances, means and methods of the instant crime; and (e) the circumstances after committing the instant crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment is somewhat inappropriate.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is justified.

3. The judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the appeal by the defendant is reasonable.