Defendant

In addition, the appeal by the person who requested the attachment order is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant with mental or physical weakness or the person to whom the attachment order was requested (hereinafter referred to as the “Defendant”) suffered from a cerebral surgery on two occasions, and the symptoms of the Defendant aggravated by drinking alcohol with mental illness, and was in a state of mental or physical loss or mental weakness at the time of committing the instant crime.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

(c)

It is unreasonable that the court below ordered the defendant to attach an electronic tracking device for three years, although the defendant does not pose a risk of recidivism in the part of the request for attachment order.

2. Determination

A. According to the record as to the assertion of mental or physical loss or mental weakness, the Defendant received brain surgery twice in 2012 on the part of “the blood under the part of an external wound with no head open address”, and the following facts are acknowledged: (a) the outbreak and the symptoms of food, clothing and loss occur intermittently after drinking; and (b) the Defendant is recognized as having drinking alcohol at the time of committing the instant crime.

On the 31st page of the trial record, however, the brain surgery that the Defendant received was not in contact with the brain organization, and thus is ordinarily recovered in almost similar conditions before and after the surgery, the Defendant of the 87th day of the trial record, the Defendant, while committing the instant crime, stated in the investigative agency about the background leading to the instant crime and the situation before and after the instant crime, and other various circumstances indicated in the record, the Defendant was in a state that the Defendant had no or weak ability to discern things or make decisions due to brain surgery and alcohol at the time of committing the instant crime.

does not appear.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's argument cannot be accepted.

B. As to the wrongful assertion of sentencing, the Defendant committed the instant crime against the wrongness while attempting to commit the instant crime.

The Defendant committed any contingent act while driving in the week.