All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) The Defendant with mental disorder was in a state of mental disorder under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the instant crime. 2) In light of the fact that the Defendant recognized all the instant crime, against whom unreasonable sentencing was committed, there is a family member to support, and the victim’s liability is partly attributable to the occurrence of damage, the lower court’s imprisonment (4 months of imprisonment) is unreasonable.

B. In light of the motive of the instant crime committed by the prosecutor, the degree of damage, etc., the lower court’s punishment is deemed as unfilled and unreasonable.

2. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of mental disorder, it is recognized that the defendant had drinking alcohol at the time of the crime of this case, but considering the circumstances, means and methods of the crime of this case, the defendant's speech before and after the crime of this case, the court below did not have the ability to discern things or make decisions at the time of the crime

did not appear to have existed in or weak condition.

Therefore, the defendant's mental disorder is without merit.

3. The Criminal Procedure Act, which takes the trial-oriented principle and the direct principle on the assertion of unfair sentencing, ought to respect the determination of sentencing in cases where there exists a unique area of the first instance court as to the determination of sentencing, and there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and the first instance court’s sentencing

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). Even if the materials submitted in the trial at the trial, there is no significant change in the sentencing conditions compared to the original judgment, and comprehensively taking account of all the factors indicated in the records of this case, it cannot be deemed that the lower court’s sentencing is heavy or is frighted so far as it exceeds the reasonable scope of discretion.

4. In conclusion, the appeal filed by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit, and all of the appeals are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.