The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The abstract of grounds for appeal (mental disorder and unreasonable sentencing);

A. In so doing, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to mental disorder and thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment, even though the crime in this case was caused by such mental disorder.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In light of the fact-finding statement on the preparation of the F Hospital Head's inquiry about the misapprehension of the legal principle, the copy of the medical record bound in the record, and the prisoner's medical record book, the defendant is recognized to have received treatment due to mental fission, depression, etc., and the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below, the following circumstances acknowledged by the court below, namely, in light of the circumstance leading up to the crime of this case, the method and method of the crime of this case, the defendant's behavior and attitude before and after the crime of this case, etc., it is not deemed that the defendant was in a state that he did not have the ability to discern things or make decisions due to mental disorder or depression at the time of the crime of this case, and thus

B. Although there are favorable circumstances for the defendant to the judgment on the assertion of unfair sentencing, such as the confession of the instant crime and the recognition of his mistake, and the fact that there is no significant damage from the instant crime, the defendant has been sentenced six times to imprisonment by night, intrusion upon residence, larceny, etc., and in particular, on June 27, 2012, the Seoul Western District Court sentenced one year to be sentenced to imprisonment for larceny by the Seoul Western District Court for one year. On May 16, 2013, the Defendant repeatedly committed the instant crime of the same case in the same kind only for two months after the end of the punishment, even though the execution of the sentence was completed, and the new sentencing after the pronouncement of the lower judgment is considered.