The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. A. The Defendant suffered from mental illness and committed a crime of deprivation of gender in a timely manner because he/she was unable to control impulse while under the influence of alcohol at the time, and thus was in a state of mental disorder.

B. The sentence of one and a half years of imprisonment sentenced by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court regarding the claim of mental disability, the Defendant was found to have been suffering from a mental disorder, despite the fact that the Defendant was in a extremely interested state at the time of committing the instant crime.

It is difficult to view that the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the instant crime (see Articles 66-67, 76-7, and 77 of the Investigation Records), and in light of other investigation attitudes, statements, and actions committed before and after committing the instant crime, etc., the Defendant does not seem to have reached a state where the Defendant had the ability to discern things or make decisions due to mental illness or drinking.

The defendant's above assertion is without merit.

B. We examine the judgment on the assertion of unfair sentencing. The crime of this case is the damage to the fishing vessel owned by the victim by using the net value, which is a dangerous object, and the nature of the crime is considerably poor. At the time, the defendant appears to have been extremely interested due to the dismissal notice, and the defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for ten months on July 1, 2010, and the execution of the punishment was completed on March 12, 201, and again committed the crime of this case on March 12, 201, even if he was a repeated crime, even if he had been punished for a repeated crime on March 12, 201, and the defendant did not pay any damage to the victim, and the victim did not want to pay any damage to the victim, and other various sentencing conditions provided for in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, such as age, character, environment, motive, means, and result before and after the crime, it seems that the sentencing of the court below is deemed reasonable, and it is too unreasonable.