The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. At the time of committing the instant crime, the Defendant was in a state of mental disorder or mental disability with mental disorder.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (four months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the records on the existence of mental and physical disorder, even though the defendant was deemed to have drinking at the time of the crime of this case, in light of the background of the crime of this case, the means and method of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the defendant did not have the ability to discern things due to drinking at the time of the crime.

Since it seems that the defendant was in a state or weak condition, the above argument by the defendant is without merit.

B. Whether or not the defendant's act of unfair sentencing is divided into and against his own mistake, and there is no extenuating circumstance to deem that at the time of the crime of this case, there was the purpose of the investigative agency's tracking avoidance and escape, or preventing sexual crimes, and that there is a need for treatment as the defendant suffers from diseases, such as kidne, etc.

However, the Defendant was subject to a decision to order the attachment of an electronic tracking device due to the recidivism of sexual crimes and the risk of recidivism, and the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for five years in the Gwangju District Court and six months in the Gwangju District Court’s Branch Branch on December 22, 2012. The Defendant committed the instant crime even during the repeated period upon completion of the execution of each of the above punishment on December 22, 2012. In order to ensure the effectiveness of the law on tracking the location, electronic device attachment, etc. of specific criminal offenders with the aim of protecting citizens from specific crimes by preventing sex offenders from repeating recidivism and re-socializing their personality and behavior, and by taking into account all of the sentencing conditions indicated in the instant case, such as the age, character and conduct, environment, the background and consequence of the instant crime, and the circumstances after the crime, the lower court’s sentence is too urgent.