The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and two months.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. At the time of each of the instant crimes, the Defendant had weak ability to discern things or make decisions due to drinking.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds of ex officio appeal, the prosecutor examined ex officio the crime of habitual assault in the facts charged in the instant case as “Habitual assault” under Article 2(1)1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act and Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act as “Articles 264 and 260(1) of the Criminal Act” under Article 264 of the Criminal Act, and Article 260(1)5 of the same Act as “a person who violated the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a group, deadly weapon, etc.)” and Article 3(1)2 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a group, deadly weapon, etc.) and Article 25(1)1 of the same Act as “a person who modified Article 6(1)1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act and Article 25(1)6(1)5 of the same Act as “a person subject to the permission of modification, etc., and Article 2(1)6(1)1 of the same Act.”

Therefore, the judgment of the court below that found the defendant guilty of all the above parts and the remaining criminal facts constituting substantive concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act and sentenced the defendant to a single punishment has no longer been maintained.

However, despite the above reasons for reversal of authority, the defendant's argument of mental and physical weakness is still subject to the judgment of this court, and this is examined.

3. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of mental and physical weakness, the defendant committed each of the crimes in this case.