beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The Defendant was suffering from alcohol dependence and was in the state of mental disorder or mental disorder due to alcohol at the time of the instant crime under the influence of alcohol.
B. In light of the overall circumstances of the instant case of unfair sentencing, the sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. The circumstances acknowledged by the court below, comprehensively based on the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of mental and physical disorder, and the defendant's drinking condition at the time of each of the crimes of this case may be recognized as having been committed. However, in light of the following: the defendant's main quantity, the circumstances leading to the crime, the defendant's behavior before and after the crime, the defendant's statement contents and attitude shown in the process of investigation, and the records of criminal punishment several times after drinking, etc., it cannot be deemed that the defendant lacks the ability to discern things or make decisions due to alcohol dependence at the time of each of the crimes of this case, and thus, the defendant's mental and physical disorder argument should not be
B. As to the assertion on unfair sentencing, the Defendant’s acknowledgement of each of the instant crimes and reflects on the recognition of each of the instant crimes, and the victim Q Q does not want the punishment against the Defendant at the investigation stage, it is reasonable to take into account the circumstances favorable to the Defendant.
However, the Defendant was punished about 18 times for the same crime (the actual power has been seven times), and was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor and imprisonment with prison labor for one year and two months at the Ulsan District Court on May 31, 2013. On March 5, 2014, the Defendant repeatedly committed each of the crimes of this case during the period of repeated offense after the execution of the sentence was completed, and the Defendant again committed the same fraud after being investigated by an investigative agency due to the instant fraud.