The judgment below

The guilty part shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

(2) the date of this judgment.

1. The lower court dismissed the prosecution as to the remaining assault and assault against the victim C among the facts charged in the instant case, and found the remainder of the facts charged guilty.

Defendant

Since only a defendant filed an appeal against the guilty portion, the part dismissing the public prosecution that the defendant did not appeal shall be limited to the part which the court below found guilty.

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant committed the instant crime under the influence of alcohol while having weak ability to discern things or make decisions. The Defendant committed the instant crime.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

3. Determination

A. According to the record as to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, the defendant's drinking at the time of committing the instant crime is recognized.

However, in light of the circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, the method and method of the instant crime, and the circumstances before and after the instant crime, the Defendant had the ability to discern things or make decisions under the influence of alcohol.

It does not seem that it does not appear.

Even if the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the instant crime, the Defendant was physically and mentally weak.

Even before committing the instant crime, the Defendant had shown a tendency to exercise violence when he was drunkly withdrawn, and even if he was well aware that he could have been able to commit a crime of violence when he was drunkly and could have predicted that he was able to commit a crime of violence. Thus, he could not reduce the punishment for mental and physical weakness pursuant to Article 10(3) of the Criminal Act.

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

B. As to the wrongful assertion of sentencing, the Defendant is aware of the fact that he/she appeared to have violent tendency when he/she voluntarily withdraws from alcohol, since he/she had been punished several times as an act of violence under the influence of liquor.