The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The crime of this case with mental disorder was committed in the state of mental disorder.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (ten months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court regarding the assertion of mental and physical disorder, although the Defendant was found to have weak ability or decision-making ability to discern things due to brain damage and functional failure at the time of committing the instant crime, it cannot be deemed that the Defendant did not have the ability or decision-making ability to discern things. Thus, this part of the Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

B. In full view of the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant had the same criminal record of judgment on the assertion of unfair sentencing; (b) the Defendant appears to have a high risk of recidivism by repeating the thief by the same criminal act during the period of repeated offense; (c) the victim of traffic accident is not recovered; and (d) the background, means and methods of the instant crime; (c) the circumstances after the instant crime; and (d) the Defendant’s age and happiness environment; and (e) the circumstances surrounding the instant records and arguments, such as the Defendant’s age and happiness environment, the sentence

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal of this case is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, since there is no reason to do so. It is so decided as per Disposition.

(However, in accordance with Article 25 (1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure, the first head of the crime in the decision of the court below is to add "the defendant has a lack of the ability to discern things or make decisions due to brain damage and the transfer of functions" to the first head of the crime in the decision of the court below.