All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) The Defendant with mental or physical disability, at the time of committing the instant crime, has reached a crime under the state of mental or physical disability, which lacks the ability to distinguish things or make decisions with low capacity. 2) The sentence sentenced by the lower court of unreasonable sentencing (ten months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor 1) In full view of the fact that misunderstanding of facts: (a) the time when the defendant invadeds on the victim’s residence exceeds 01:00 times; (b) the defendant’s act is not consistent with the defendant’s defense that he had his house; (c) the victim was also aware of the defendant as a thief; and (d) the victim, who was the victim “the victim must,” escaped, had intentionally intruded on the victim’s house at night, started the execution of the night thief and had the fact committed the attempted thief; and (b) the punishment sentenced by the lower court of unreasonable sentencing is unreasonable because it is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) The summary of this part of the facts charged and the summary of this part of the facts charged by the lower court’s judgment are as follows: “A defendant intentionally committed an attempted crime against the victim’s residence at night on August 31, 2018 when thief intentionally intending to open a window-debrising network by intentionally going beyond the wall of the victim’s house and going beyond the wall of the thief on August 31, 2018.” Accordingly, the lower court acquitted the Defendant of the charge of larceny at night on the ground that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is insufficient to deem that the Defendant intentionally committed the above act, and sentenced the Defendant guilty of the crime of intrusion at night. 2) In light of the fact that the Defendant invadedd the victim’s residence at latest, and that the Defendant did not explain the reasons for committing such a crime, the lower court determined that the Defendant intentionally invaded the victim’s residence at night.

However, the records of this case.