The second sentence of the judgment of the court below is "No. 11:00 on April 6, 2014."

2. Determination

A. The offense of murder against the accused case is a serious crime that deprives human life, which is the most valuable value that cannot be recovered from damage by any means, and its possibility of criticism is very high.

The crime of this case is very harsh because the defendant borrowed money from the victim or took seven times the victim's son who was prepared in advance, thereby causing the death of the victim.

Although it is apparent that the crime of this case is likely to cause physical or mental harm to the victim and his/her bereaved family members, the defendant does not have any effort to recover damage to the bereaved family members, etc., which is disadvantageous to the defendant.

On the other hand, the Defendant recognized the facts charged in this case and against it, and committed the crime in this case under the state that the Defendant lacks the ability to discern things or make decisions due to recovery from a mental disorder, etc., and the Defendant appears to need mental treatment for a considerable period of time due to the above tide, etc. are favorable to the Defendant.

In full view of the aforementioned favorable or unfavorable circumstances, as well as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, circumstances leading to each of the instant offenses, and circumstances after the commission of the offense, it is not deemed that the lower court’s sentence against the Defendant is too heavy or unreasonable to the extent that it should be reversed.

Therefore, the defendant and prosecutor's argument are without merit.

B. As long as the defendant files an appeal against a prosecuted case, the medical treatment and custody claim shall be deemed to have filed an appeal in accordance with Article 14(2) of the Medical Treatment and Custody Act.