The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. A. The Defendant was suffering from a shock disorder due to a second damage caused by an abortion that occurred prior to the instant crime, and even at the time of the instant crime, the Defendant was in a state of lacking the ability to discern things or make decisions due to such shock disorder.

In addition, at the time of committing the instant crime, the Defendant had weak ability to discern things or make decisions.

B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the claim of mental disability, the court below also asserted the same purport, and the defendant did not have the ability to discern things or make decisions at the time of committing the instant crime in light of various circumstances, such as the course and content of the instant crime, method of the crime, and the situation before and after it, which is acknowledged by the evidence of the court below.

We rejected the Defendant’s assertion on the ground that it cannot be deemed that there was or was a weak state.

In examining the judgment of the court below in comparison with the records, the judgment of the court below is just, and there is no error of law as alleged by the defendant. Thus, this part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.

I would like to say.

B. We examine the argument of unfair sentencing, and the crime of this case committed by the defendant, following the victim of a protruding site discovered by chance as the reasons stated in the judgment of the court below, and forced the victim to commit an indecent act and have the victim suffer injury as stated in the judgment of the court below, and the crime is more serious in light of the details and contents of the crime, method of the crime, and degree of damage.

The crime of this case committed by the defendant is the mental suffering of the victim.