The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Mental and physical disorder (related to the part 2016 Highly 2433 out of the facts charged in the instant case) is a case where the Defendant suffers from serious chronic alcohol addiction, and where the Defendant drinks, he/she is suffering from a crypta and a crypta while suffering from a crypta, and becomes a reality.

The Defendant dices alcohol from the day immediately before the day of the crime as stated in this part of the facts charged, and experienced a sense that three of the abnormal males threaten themselves.

The Defendant believed that such a transshipment is real reality, avoided the body from the above male to the restaurant operated by the injured person, and the restaurant door was set up as an auxiliary device at the higher level of the cafeteria.

The replacement angle of the defendant is continuing in the restaurant, and it leads to the damage of the house in the restaurant by fasting the cooling house in the restaurant to the above male.

Therefore, this part of the facts charged is that the defendant committed a crime in a state that he or she was unable to discern things or make decisions due to the remaining after he or she gets a drinking in the hall of drinking, or due to mental or physical disorder.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (the penalty amounting to KRW 3.5 million) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the records of the instant case’s assertion of mental and physical disorder, the Defendant was treated with chronic alcohol dependence; the Defendant is deemed to have been in a state of drinking at the time of the instant crime, but even considering such circumstances, considering the background of the instant crime, the means and method thereof, the Defendant’s attitude before and after the instant crime, and the circumstances after the instant crime, etc., the Defendant does not seem to have been in a state of having lost or weak ability to discern things or make decisions at the time of the instant crime. Accordingly, this part of the Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

B. We examine the determination of the unfair argument of sentencing, and the Defendant’s charges of this case.