The judgment of the court below is reversed.

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

No. 1 of the seized evidence shall be from the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. At the time of each of the instant crimes, the Defendant was in a state of mental and physical loss or mental weakness by drinking alcohol.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court (two years of imprisonment, confiscation) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. We examine ex officio determination.

In the trial of the court, the prosecutor applied for the amendment of the bill of amendment to the Criminal Act to "Article 3 (1), Article 2 (1) 3, and Article 257 (1) of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act," among the names of the crimes against the defendant, "Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a group, deadly weapon, etc.)" as "special injury", and "Article 3 (1), Article 2 (1) 3, and Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act" as "Article 258-2 (1) and Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act". This court permitted the amendment, and the subject of the judgment was changed by this court, and the remaining criminal facts are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and thus, the entire judgment of the court below cannot be maintained.

B. Determination as to the defendant's mental and physical disability argument is still meaningful even if the defendant's mental and physical disability is reversed ex officio.

According to the records of this case, even though the defendant was aware that he had drinking at the time of committing each of the crimes of this case, considering such circumstances, considering the circumstances, the defendant's attitude and behavior before and after committing each of the crimes of this case cannot be deemed to have reached a state where the defendant had lost or weak ability to discern things or make decisions at the time of committing the crimes of this case. Thus, the defendant's mental and physical disability argument cannot be accepted.

3. The judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's unfair argument of sentencing, on the grounds that the above reasoning of the judgment below is reversed ex officio, and the following is again reversed after pleading.