The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

The Defendant, at the time of the instant case, was in a state of falling short of the ability to discern things or make decisions due to the de facto disability and de facto disability.

The punishment sentenced by the court below of unfair sentencing (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

Judgment

In light of various circumstances, such as the background and method of the instant crime, the Defendant’s behavior before and after the instant crime, etc., it cannot be deemed that the Defendant did not lack the ability to discern things or make decisions due to the de facto disorder and the de facto state at the time of the instant crime, and thus, the Defendant’s above assertion cannot be accepted.

Although the Defendant agreed with the victim G, who is the victim of the instant injury, the Defendant committed the instant crime, even though he/she was released on January 13, 2010 by the Seoul Eastern District Court on parole on March 30, 201 and the parole period on July 29, 201, and committed the instant crime during the period of repeated crimes after the expiration of the parole period on July 29, 2011. As above, the Defendant was sentenced to each of the fines due to the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Drivers, etc.), insult, and bodily injury before the instant crime after parole on March 30, 201, and the Defendant committed the instant crime. In addition, in full view of the motive for the instant crime, the circumstances after the instant crime, the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, etc., the sentence that the lower court sentenced is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.