The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal explicitly withdrawn the allegation of grounds for appeal by misunderstanding the legal principles on the second trial date.

A. At the time of committing the instant crime, the Defendant had weak ability to distinguish things and make decisions due to symptoms that are difficult to suppress the impulse of larceny, etc.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (three years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the instant record as to the assertion of mental and physical weakness, the fact that the Defendant was diagnosed on February 24, 2014 as “uneasy disorder”, “military register walls”, and “hicker’s Do’s Do’s Do’s Do’s Do’s Do’s Do’s Do’s Do’s Do’s Do’

However, in full view of the circumstances such as the background leading up to the instant crime, the specific details of the crime, the means and method of the crime, the circumstances after the commission of the crime, and the circumstances after the commission of the instant crime, and the fact that the Defendant sold a funeral service on four to five occasions on the southwest Seoul Northern market, in particular, a certain degree of theft was stolen and disposed of, and the theft was disposed of if there are a large number of theft goods (No. 180 page of the evidence record), and the purport of presumed that the content of the written mental appraisal prepared according to the commission of deliberation by the party mental expert witness was relatively sound enough to distinguish things at the time of the instant crime (the possibility that the Defendant actually experienced mental difficulties is determined to have been written, and the response was included in the most significant implications of mental pathology at the time of the instant crime). In full view of the following factors, the Defendant at the time of the instant crime, including the content that the Defendant had the ability to change things or lacks the ability to make decisions due to mental illness, etc.

does not appear.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's argument cannot be accepted.

B. The Defendant appears to have the attitude of recognizing and opposing the wrongness with regard to the wrongful argument of sentencing.