The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, at the time of committing the instant crime, was in a state of lacking ability to discern things or make decisions due to the extreme disorder, etc.

B. The sentence sentenced by the court below to the defendant (one year of imprisonment, one year of confiscation) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the record of determination on the assertion of misunderstanding of the legal doctrine, the fact that the defendant is a alcohol dependent witness, the fact that he/she is a patient suspected of suffering from early death, etc. is recognized.

However, in light of all the circumstances such as the Defendant’s behavior mode at the time of committing the instant crime, the specific details of the instant crime, and the circumstances before and after the instant crime, including the fact that the Defendant prepared the salted fish to be used in the commission of the crime, and the victim’s mother threatened the police with the defect, etc., the Defendant was in a state of lacking ability to discern things or make decisions.

subsection (b) of this section.

Therefore, the defendant's argument of mental and physical weakness cannot be accepted.

B. The Defendant committed the instant crime during the period of repeated crime due to the crime of special robbery, the attempted special robbery, and the violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a collective weapon, etc.).

The defendant has been subject to three times of criminal punishment for committing robbery, such as attempted special robbery, and is subject to six times of imprisonment for the larceny, and has been subject to ten times of criminal punishment.

The punishment records include the crime of robbery committed by the defendant at a knife and knife convenience store.

With the instant crime, the victim seems to feel a considerable threat and to have been uneasy.

In full view of the above circumstances and other circumstances, the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, family relationship, motive and background of the crime, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable.