The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

One metre (No. 1) for seized timber.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant had a very mental and physical weak condition under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing a dangerous act of personal injury.

B. The punishment sentenced by the court below (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant.

In the trial of the party, the prosecutor applied the applicable law to “special injury” as “Article 3(1), Article 2(1)3 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, and Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act” as “Article 258-2(1) and Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act,” with regard to the violation of the Act on the Punishment of Violences, Etc. (a collective deadly weapon, etc.) as to the carrying of dangerous articles among the facts charged in the instant case, and applied law to change the same to “Article 258-2(1) and Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act,” respectively, and the subject of the judgment was changed by the court.

Since the above crime and the rest of the judgment of the court below are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, one sentence should be sentenced, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained any more in this respect.

However, the defendant's argument about mental and physical weakness is still subject to the judgment of this court, and this is examined.

B. According to the record of determination on the assertion of mental and physical weakness, it is recognized that the defendant was in a state of drinking alcohol at the time of committing the crime of bodily injury to carry dangerous items.

However, in light of various circumstances, such as the situation at the time of the above crime, the background leading to the crime, the method of the crime, and the defendant's behavior before and after the crime, which are acknowledged by evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the defendant was under the influence of alcohol and had no or weak ability to discern things or make decisions.

It does not seem that it does not appear.

This part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.

3. The judgment of the court below is erroneous for the defendant's sentencing on the ground that the above reasons are reversed ex officio.