Defendant

All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

Summary of Reasons for appeal

A. Defendant (unfair sentencing and mental and physical disorder) 1) The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (two months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2) At the time of the instant case, the Defendant had the ability to discern things or make decisions under the influence of alcohol, and thus, such points should be considered.

B. The Prosecutor’s above sentence is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the Defendant’s mental and physical assertion, the Defendant had no or weak ability to discern things or make decisions under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the instant crime.

The argument is asserted.

According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the court below, the defendant appears to have been under the influence of alcohol at the time of the crime of this case, but considering various circumstances such as the background of the crime of this case, the details of the crime, and the defendant's behavior before and after the crime of this case, the defendant was in a state that there was no or weak ability to discern things or make decisions.

It does not seem that it does not appear.

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

B. As to the wrongful argument of sentencing by the Defendant and the Prosecutor, the Defendant recognized the instant crime and recognized his mistake, and the fact that the instant crime was committed in preparation is favorable to the Defendant.

On the other hand, the Defendant’s crime of this case cannot be deemed to be somewhat poor, and the Defendant committed the crime of this case during the suspended execution period, etc. is disadvantageous to the Defendant.

Considering the above circumstances and other circumstances, such as the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, family relationship, motive and background of the crime, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, the lower court’s punishment is deemed appropriate as a punishment within the scope of the discretion for sentencing.

Therefore, the defendant and the prosecutor.