The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant was in a state of mental disability under the influence of alcohol at the time of each of the instant crimes.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (10 months) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Comprehensively taking account of various circumstances such as the behavior before and after each crime, the contents of each of the instant crimes, etc. revealed in the judgment records as to the claim of mental retardation, the Defendant was found to have been under the influence of alcohol, but it was confirmed that the Defendant had been under the influence of alcohol and received treatment under the name of ward, such as the symptoms of alcohol use, etc. at the hospital. In full view of the aforementioned circumstances, the Defendant was able to sufficiently perceive or recognize that the Defendant could have been under the influence of alcohol by himself/herself, even though he/she was able to have sufficiently perceived or aware of the fact that he/she could have been under the influence of alcohol, and caused a situation in which the Defendant was under the influence of using violence without any justifiable reason since he/she lost the remaining self-control power.

Therefore, the defendant's ability to discern things or make a decision was somewhat diminished due to excessiveness at the time of each crime, such as the defendant's assertion.

Even if the defendant voluntarily caused the above conditions, the defendant constitutes "a person who has predicted the occurrence of danger and has caused mental disorder by his/her own person" as stipulated in Article 10 (3) of the Criminal Act, and thus cannot be mitigated due to mental disorder under the Criminal Act. Thus, the defendant's claim for mental disorder caused by drinking of the defendant shall be rejected.

B. There are no favorable circumstances, such as the confession of the Defendant on the assertion of unfair sentencing, and the fact that the victims have not been able to easily agree with the victims.

However, considering that the criminal defendant has been punished for the same crime of violence and has been committed during the same period of repeated crime, and in particular, the crime of the victim D is committed on the day of release, the nature of the crime is very bad and re-offending.