The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal by the defendant;

A. The judgment of the court below which did not reduce mental and physical disability when the defendant alleged mental and physical disability was under the influence of alcohol at the time of the crime in this case is erroneous in misconception of facts or misapprehension of legal principles as to mental and physical disability.

B. The lower court’s imprisonment (ten months of imprisonment and forty hours of sexual assault treatment programs) on the ground of unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of all the circumstances, such as the means and method of the instant crime, the Defendant’s act before and after the instant crime, and the circumstances after the instant crime, which were revealed in the judgment on the claim of mental retardation, the fact that the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol at the time of the instant crime is deemed to have not been in a state where the ability to discern things or make decisions was weak at the time of the instant crime.

Therefore, the defendant's argument of mental disability is without merit.

B. It is recognized that the Defendant made a confession of the instant crime, appears to repent of his mistake, and there is a mother to support the Defendant.

However, in light of the fact that the Defendant had been sentenced to eight months of imprisonment due to the crime of interference with business and obscenity of public performance in around 2012, the Defendant again committed the instant crime during the period of each repeated crime due to the crime of interference with business and obstruction of performance of official duties, etc. up to the trial, the Defendant did not agree with the victim of the crime of interference with business up to the trial, or did not recover from damage. In full view of the equity in sentencing with the same similar case, the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, motive of the instant crime, circumstances after the instant crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment is deemed appropriate.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit.

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal by the defendant is groundless.