The remaining parts of the judgment of the court of first instance excluding the compensation order part and the judgment of the court of second instance are reversed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Mental and physical disorder (the second instance judgment) was in a state of mental and physical disorder by drinking alcohol at the time of assaulting a taxi engineer as stated in this part of the facts charged.

B. Each judgment of the court below on the unfair sentencing (Article 1: 1 year of imprisonment, and 3 months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant ex officio shall be examined ex officio.

This Court decided to consolidate each appeal case against the judgment below and decided to hold the judgment below together, and each of the offenses against the judgment below is concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and shall be sentenced to a single sentence within the scope of a limited term of punishment pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. Therefore, all of the judgment below should be reversed.

However, despite the above reasons for ex officio destruction, the defendant's mental and physical disability in the second instance judgment is still subject to the judgment of this court, and this is examined below.

3. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court regarding the Defendant’s mental disorder claim regarding the second instance judgment, it is recognized that the Defendant had drinking alcohol at the time of assaulting a taxi engineer as stated in this part of the facts charged.

However, in light of various circumstances, such as the background of the crime, the method of the crime, and the Defendant’s speech and behavior before and after the crime in this part, it is not recognized that the Defendant had a lack or weak ability to discern things or make decisions due to drinking at the time of the crime in this part.

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

4. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, and it is again decided as follows, without proceeding proceeding to decide on the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing.