All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and two months.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) The Defendant was in the state of mental illness or mental and physical disability due to drinking at the time of the instant case. 2) The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (the first instance court: imprisonment with prison labor for August and the second instance court: imprisonment with prison labor for six months) is too unreasonable.

B. The first instance court’s sentence of the Prosecutor is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds of appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor ex officio, the court of first instance and the court of second instance concurrently tried the cases of appeal by the court of second instance against the defendant. Each of the crimes of the first and second judgment is concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and thus, should be punished as a single sentence within the term or amount of punishment, for which an aggravated concurrent crimes have been imposed pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is no longer maintained in this respect.

However, the defendant's argument about mental disorder is still subject to the judgment of this court, despite the above reasons for ex officio reversal.

3. According to the records on the Defendant’s assertion of mental and physical disorder, even though the Defendant was aware of drinking alcohol at the time of committing the instant crime, considering such circumstances, considering the background of the instant crime, the means and method of committing the instant crime, the Defendant’s attitude and speech before and after committing the instant crime, and the circumstances after committing the instant crime, it may be deemed that the Defendant committed the instant crime by contingency in a situation where the Defendant’s self-harm was weakened due to drinking, and it does not seem that the Defendant did not have reached a state where the ability to discern things or make decisions was lost or weak at the time of committing the instant crime, and therefore, the Defendant’s mental

4. Accordingly, the defendant's mental and physical argument is without merit, and the judgment of the court below is without merit, and the defendant's decision on the defendant's allegation of unfair sentencing is without merit.