The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. As to the crime under paragraph (2) of the judgment of the court below, the defendant was in a state of mental disorder by administering phiphonephones.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one year of imprisonment, additional collection of one hundred thousand won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the records on the assertion of mental and physical disorder, at the time, the Defendant’s use of the medicine prescribed by the mental department for a four-day period at the time of committing the instant crime as stated in the judgment below, and the fact that the Defendant administered the medicine in the same manner as indicated in the judgment of the court below, may be recognized. However, in light of the following: (a) the Defendant’s statement that the victimized mother, at the time of committing the instant crime, was erroneous as a Doar; (b) the means and method of the instant crime; (c) the Defendant’s act before and after committing the instant crime; and (d) the circumstances after committing the instant crime, etc.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's argument is without merit.

B. The Korean Criminal Procedure Act, which adopts the trial-oriented principle and the principle of directness on the assertion of unfair sentencing, has the unique area of the first instance court as to the determination of sentencing, and where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the first instance court’s sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, the appellate

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). The Defendant recognized the instant crime and was under the influence of avoiding the intent of a short-term medication.

However, the defendant committed the crime of this case again on three days after he was sentenced to a suspended sentence of imprisonment for the same crime.

In light of the defendant's punishment power and the contents of the crime of this case, the addiction to the defendant's penphone appears to have been serious and violence in home has continued for a long time.

In light of the above point.