The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. At the time of committing the instant crime, the Defendant, who was physically and mentally weak, was under the influence of alcohol.

B. The punishment of the lower court (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court regarding the assertion of mental and physical weakness, the Defendant could recognize a little of drinking alcohol at the time of committing the instant crime, but it does not seem that the Defendant had no or weak ability to discern things, thereby making a decision.

This part of the defendant's assertion is not accepted.

B. Determination 1 on an unfair assertion of sentencing is based on statutory penalty, and a discretionary judgment is made within reasonable and appropriate scope, taking into account the factors constituting conditions for sentencing under Article 51 of the Criminal Act, based on the statutory penalty.

However, considering the unique area of sentencing of sentencing of the first instance that is respected under the principle of trial priority and the principle of direct jurisdiction taken by our criminal litigation law and the nature of the ex post facto review of the appellate court, the sentencing of sentencing of the first instance was exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion when comprehensively taking into account the factors and guidelines for sentencing specified in the first instance sentencing trial process.

In light of the records newly discovered in the course of the appellate court’s sentencing hearing, it is reasonable to file an unfair judgment of the first instance court, only in cases where it is deemed unfair to maintain the sentencing of the first instance court as it is for the court to judge the sentencing of the first instance court.

In the absence of such exceptional circumstances, it is desirable to respect the sentencing of the first instance court (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). 2) The circumstances alleged by the Defendant as an element favorable to sentencing in the first instance court have already been discovered in the hearing process of the lower court, and the matters favorable to the sentencing criteria after the sentence of the lower court was rendered.