The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. At the time of committing the instant crime, the Defendant was in a state of mental or physical disorder having no or weak ability to discern things or make decisions.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below regarding the assertion of mental disorder, the fact that the defendant committed each of the crimes of this case while drinking alcohol can be acknowledged. However, in light of the circumstances revealed by the above evidence, the circumstances before and after each of the crimes of this case, the defendant's behavior at the time of each of the crimes of this case, etc., it is not deemed that the defendant did not have the ability or ability to make a decision to discern things at the time of the crime of this case.

Therefore, we cannot accept this part of the defendant's assertion.

B. In determining the punishment against the defendant, the court below sentenced the punishment within the recommended range of the sentencing guidelines set by the Supreme Court, taking into account all the circumstances favorable to the defendant's age, sexual conduct, family relationship, means and results of the crime, etc., taking into account the following circumstances: (a) the defendant had already committed the same kind of crime and had been punished six times or more; and (b) the defendant had committed each of the crimes in particular during the same repeated crime period; (c) the damage was not recovered at all; and (d) the victims have never been punished; and (e) the defendant committed each of the crimes in this case and reflects his mistake; and (e) the defendant committed each of the crimes in this case, and (e) the punishment was imposed within the recommended range of the sentencing guidelines set by the Supreme Court.

Examining the above sentencing of the lower court in light of the record, the lower court’s determination of sentencing exceeded the reasonable bounds of its discretion.

It cannot be seen, and the judgment of the court below is at the trial.