Of the judgment of the court below of first instance, the part against Defendant A and the judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A1) At the time of committing each of the crimes stated in the judgment of the first instance court, the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol and was in a state of mental disability. 2) The sentence imposed on the Defendant by the judgment of the lower court on unreasonable sentencing (one and half years of imprisonment of the lower court, and eight months of imprisonment of the lower court) is too unreasonable and unfair.

B. The first instance court’s sentence (Defendant A: imprisonment with prison labor for one year and six months, Defendant B: fine of three million won) declared by the court below to the Defendants is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Determination

A. The judgment ex officio is examined prior to the judgment of both parties as to Defendant A’s assertion.

All of the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty and each of the above judgments in relation to concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, which shall be sentenced to one of the judgment below, should be sentenced to a single sentence within the scope of punishment aggravated by concurrent crimes pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. Therefore, the part of the judgment of the court of first instance against Defendant A and the judgment of the court of second instance cannot be maintained.

However, the defendant's argument about mental and physical disorder is still subject to the judgment of this court, despite the above reasons for ex officio reversal.

B. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly admitted and examined by the first instance court as to Defendant A’s assertion of mental disorder, the fact that the Defendant was in a state of drinking alcohol at the time of each crime in the first instance judgment is recognized.

However, in full view of the circumstances revealed by the above evidence, such as the background leading up to each of the above crimes, the means and methods of the crime, the defendant's behavior before and after the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, it is determined that the defendant did not have the ability to discern things or make decisions due to the above crimes.

Therefore, this part of the defendant.