The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. At the time of the instant crime, the Defendant was in a state with weak capacity to discern things or make decisions by taking advantage of the right and wrongness.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (two years of suspended execution in August, and forty hours of order to attend school) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination:

A. According to the records of mental and physical disability, although it is possible to recognize the fact that the defendant committed the crime of this case under the influence of drinking, considering the circumstances leading to the crime, the defendant's act before and after the crime of this case, etc., it seems that the defendant did not have the ability to discern things or make decisions under the influence of alcohol at the time of the crime of this case. Thus, the

B. It does not seem that there are new circumstances or special changes in circumstances to reflect in the sentencing after the sentence of unfair sentencing was rendered, and further, considering the circumstances and various sentencing conditions stated in the reasons for sentencing as a whole, it cannot be deemed that the lower court exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion by its excessive discretion. Thus, the Defendant’s assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit.

3. The defendant's appeal is without merit. Thus, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.