The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The court below rejected the application for compensation by the applicant for compensation, and since the above application for compensation became final and conclusive immediately since it was not possible to file an objection against the judgment dismissing the application for compensation pursuant to Article 32(4) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, the part of the court below's rejection of the above application for compensation in the judgment below is excluded

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. At the time of committing the crime, the Defendant was in a state of mental disorder or mental disability.

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

3. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court regarding the assertion of mental disorder, the fact that the Defendant was a physically disabled person is recognized, but in light of the background, means, methods, and the Defendant’s behavior before and after the instant crime, etc., the Defendant lost the ability to discern things and make decisions at the time of the instant crime.

such ability may not be deemed to have been in a weak state.

The defendant's argument about mental disorder shall not be accepted.

B. As to the assertion of unfair sentencing, the fact that the Defendant recognized the facts charged and opposed to the mistake, and that the amount of damage is not significant is favorable to the Defendant.

On the other hand, in full view of the circumstances unfavorable to the Defendant, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, motive and background of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc., even though the Defendant had already been punished for the same kind of crime at the time of the crime in this case, and the Defendant again led to the crime in this case without being aware of even though he had been committed for a repeated crime due to the same crime even at the time of the crime in this case, the sentencing of the lower court is unreasonable because it goes beyond the reasonable discretion.

Defendant.