The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant was in a state of mental and physical weakness under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the instant crime.

B. The sentence of the lower court (one year of imprisonment) against an unjust defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the record as to the assertion of mental and physical weakness, even though the defendant was in a state of drinking alcohol to a certain extent at the time of the crime of this case, the defendant was deemed to have had the ability to discern things or make decisions due to drinking, in light of the fact that the defendant had been in a state of drinking alcohol at a convenience store, and was engaged in the crime of this case by drinking alcohol and drinking alcohol at a convenience store.

Therefore, the defendant's argument about mental and physical weakness is without merit.

B. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court as to the unfair argument of sentencing, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it. Although the sentence of the first instance court falls within the reasonable scope of discretion, it is desirable to refrain from rendering a sentence that does not differ from the first instance court on the sole ground of the difference between the opinion of the appellate court and the judgment of the first instance court (Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). In accordance with the foregoing legal doctrine, there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court and the first instance court.

The crime of this case is committed by the defendant according to the victim who is a high school student at night, and is bad in the quality of the crime, and the fact that the defendant did not receive a letter from the injured party is disadvantageous. The confession and reflect of the crime, and the fact that the defendant is the first offender is favorable.

In light of the above sentencing conditions, it is too heavy to the extent that the court below's punishment against the defendant cannot be reversed.

Therefore, the defendant's argument of sentencing is without merit.

3. Thus, the defendant's appeal is without merit and Article 364 of the Criminal Procedure Act is not reasonable.