The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, at the time of committing the instant crime, was in a state of mental disorder or mental disability.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (two months of imprisonment, additional collection) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In light of the background leading up to the instant crime, the means and method of the crime, and the circumstances before and after the instant crime, it cannot be deemed that the Defendant had weak ability to discern things or make decisions due to mental and physical disorder at the time of the instant crime.

The defendant's assertion of mistake is without merit.

B. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court’s judgment on the assertion of unfair sentencing, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, the appellate court is reasonable to respect the determination of sentencing of

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). The Defendant is fully aware of and against all facts pertaining to the instant crime.

The Defendant had the number of people immediately after the philophone medication.

However, the Defendant committed the instant crime during the period of suspension of execution due to a special injury, etc., as well as multiple violent crimes.

In particular, the defendant committed the same injury as before the suspension of the above execution in a pending trial due to the administration of phiphones.

The damage caused by the crime of injury was not recovered, and the victim was not able to receive a letter from the victim.

In addition, comprehensively taking into account the following circumstances and circumstances of the lower court’s sentencing, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, circumstances after the commission of the crime, and the result thereof, there are no special circumstances or changes in circumstances that may change the lower court’s sentencing after the commission of the crime, the sentence imposed by the lower court may be deemed unfair beyond the scope of appropriate and reasonable discretion.