The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although the Defendant was unable or weak to discern things or make decisions by drinking alcohol at the time of committing the instant crime, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on mental and physical disorder, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence of imprisonment (six months of imprisonment) imposed by the court below on the defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In light of the background, process, means and method of the instant crime, the Defendant’s behavior before and after the instant crime was committed, etc. as revealed in the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, it is deemed that the Defendant was aware of drinking at the time of the instant crime, but it does not seem that the Defendant did not have the ability to discern things or make decisions, and thus, the above assertion by the Defendant is rejected.

B. Although the Defendant’s wrong determination on the assertion of unfair sentencing is favorable to the Defendant, the crime of this case is committed by the Defendant on the basis of the victim’s violent inclination without any special reason, and thus, it does not seem that the Defendant committed an injury requiring medical treatment for 28 days, and the nature of the crime is not easy, and the Defendant committed the crime of this case without being subject to probation, even though he was under probation, and did not agree with the victim, and did not completely recover damage, taking into account the motive and background leading up to the instant crime, the circumstances before and after the instant crime, the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, family relationship, environment, occupation, etc., and other various circumstances that are conditions for sentencing specified in the records, such as the motive and circumstance leading up to the instant crime, the Defendant’s age, personality and conduct, family relationship, occupation, etc., it cannot

3. Thus, the defendant's appeal is without merit.