The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

Provided, That the above punishment shall be imposed for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, under the influence of alcohol, has committed each of the crimes in this case under the state of mental disability.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (ten months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The lower court, ex officio, deemed the Defendant as having led to the confession of the facts charged in the instant case, and determined and notified that the Defendant should be tried through a simplified trial procedure, and determined the evidence examination in accordance with Article 297-2 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in the instant case based on such evidence, on the ground that the evidence presented by the lower court was admissible pursuant

However, according to the records of the first trial by the court below, the defendant stated that all of the facts charged of this case is recognized on the first trial date, and all of the facts charged of this case is deemed to have been led to confession. However, on the other hand, the defendant's examination conducted on the same trial date stated that "if circumstances arise from a large number of drinking places, and the situation is not well memory," there is room to deem that the defendant denies the facts charged, or at least asserts the reason for denying the responsibility of mental disorder (see Supreme Court Decision 2004Do2116, Jul. 9, 2004). Even if the defendant is deemed to have led to the confession of all of the facts charged of this case, it is remarkably unfair to judge this case as a simple trial procedure.

Therefore, this court cancelled the order of the court below that decided to judge by summary trial procedure in accordance with Article 286-3 of the Criminal Procedure Act, so the judgment of the court below can no longer be maintained in this respect.

However, the defendant's argument of mental disability is still subject to the judgment of this court, and this is examined below.

3. According to the record of judgment on the claim of mental disability, it is recognized that the defendant had drinking alcohol at the time of committing the crime, but the defendant's ordinary drinking and commits the crime.