The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Since the Defendant, while under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing each of the instant crimes, committed each of the instant crimes under the influence of mental and physical loss or mental weakness, he cannot be punished for the Defendant, or the sentence against the Defendant should be mitigated.

The defendant and his defense counsel stated only the unfair appeal for sentencing in the court of the first instance on the grounds of appeal. However, on April 24, 2018, the defendant submitted a written argument on mental and physical disorder, which will be examined below.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (4 months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the records of the instant case’s assertion of mental disorder, the Defendant was deemed to have been in a drunken state at the time of each of the instant crimes, but in full view of the developments leading up to each of the instant crimes, the means and methods of each of the instant crimes, and the circumstances before and after each of the instant crimes, the Defendant had no or weak ability to discern things or make decisions at the time of each of the instant crimes.

shall not be deemed to exist.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

B. We examine the determination of the unfair argument of sentencing, and the fact that the defendant led to the confession of the crime and reflects the mistake, and the victim does not want the punishment, etc. are favorable to the defendant.

However, the fact that the defendant had been punished more than 20 times for crimes such as violence, interference with duties, interference with the execution of official duties, etc., in particular, the fact that the defendant committed the crime of this case again without being aware of the fact that he committed the crime of this case, even though he had been punished twice or more for the last three to four years.

In addition, considering the fact that there is no particular change in the sentencing conditions compared to the original judgment and the various sentencing conditions shown in the records and arguments of this case, the lower court’s sentence cannot be deemed unfair. Thus, the above assertion by the Defendant is without merit.

3...