The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. At the time of committing the instant crime, the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol and had no or weak ability to discern things or make decisions.

B. The lower court’s imprisonment (one year of imprisonment) is too heavy in consideration of various circumstances on the Defendant’s grounds of unreasonable sentencing.

2. Determination

A. According to the records of mental and physical disorder, even though the defendant was aware of drinking alcohol at the time of the crime of this case, the defendant did not have the ability to discern things or make decisions in light of the following circumstances: the process, means and method of the crime of this case, and the defendant's speech and behavior before and after the crime of this case.

Since the defendant's allegation in this part does not seem to have reached a state of or weakness, it is without merit.

(Ex officio, the lower court did not render any judgment on the Defendant’s assertion that the Defendant was in a state of mental disorder by drinking alcohol at the time of committing the instant crime. However, as seen earlier, it is recognized that the Defendant was not in a state of mental disorder or mental disorder due to drinking at the time of committing the instant crime. As such, the lower court’s omission of judgment did not affect the conclusion of the judgment, and thus, it does not constitute grounds for reversal of the lower judgment).

Although the Defendant does not have any favorable circumstances for the Defendant, such as the fact that the Defendant recognized all of the instant crimes and against his mistake, the Defendant did not want the Defendant’s punishment by agreement with the victim K, and the Defendant purchased a customer with an amount equivalent to KRW 120,000,00 at the market price on December 27, 2012 and compensated for damages, etc. However, even before the instant crime was committed, the Defendant did not have any favorable circumstances for the Defendant. Meanwhile, even before the instant crime was committed, the force of the Defendant, including the crime of violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, the crime of interference with business, the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties, the crime of damaging public goods, and the crime of damaging property, has been punished more than 3