The punishment of the accused shall be determined by six months of imprisonment.

A. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the first instance court as to the assertion of mistake of facts, the defendant's allegation that the defendant actually stolen or stolen the article as stated in the facts charged in the instant case is not acceptable.

B. According to the evidence Nos. 1 (S. reply to the truth-finding), etc. submitted in the trial at the trial as to the assertion of mental or physical disorder, the defendant can be found to have been diagnosed with the accident disorder, s.g., the defendant's symptoms, or s.g., the background of each of the crimes of this case, the defendant's behavior before and after the crime of this case, and the circumstances after the crime of this case, it is sufficient to view that the defendant had a somewhat weak ability to discern things or make decisions due to the accident disorder at the time of each of the crimes of this case. Thus, the above argument by the defendant, which points this point, is justified.

3. According to the conclusion, the Defendant’s appeal is justifiable, and the judgment of the first instance court is reversed under Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the allegation of unfair sentencing, and the following is again decided after pleading.

The criminal facts and the summary of the evidence recognized by the court are the same as the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, they are quoted in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Article 329 of the Criminal Act, Article 342 and Article 329 of the Criminal Act, Article 10(2) and (1), and Article 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act, which shall be mitigated by Act No. 1. 1. The former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act, which shall be aggravated by concurrent crimes.