준특수강도등
1. The judgment of the court of first instance and the judgment of the court of second instance are reversed.
2.(a)
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two years and six months.
(b).
Summary of Grounds for Appeal
The Defendant and the person requesting probation order (hereinafter “Defendant”) appealed against the judgment of the court of first instance against the judgment of the court of first instance, and argued that the Defendant was a crime in a state of mental disorder or mental retardation. However, during the first trial of the court of first instance, the Defendant withdrawn the above assertion on the grounds of sentencing, stating that “the Defendant did not claim mental disorder or mental retardation but did not claim it in a normal state at the time.”
Furthermore, in light of the following: (a) ex officio, the method by which each of the crimes in the judgment of the court of first instance was committed; and (b) the statement in the process of interrogation, etc., it is difficult to view that the defendant had the ability to discern things or make decisions at the time of the above crimes
At the time of each crime, the suffering from alcohol dependence, depression, and so on had weak ability to distinguish things and make decisions.
The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (the first instance court: imprisonment of 2 years and 6 months, and imprisonment of 2 months and 6 months) is too unreasonable.
Judgment
Determination on the part of the defendant's case: The judgment of the court of first instance and the judgment of the court of second instance on the defendant's consolidated trial were sentenced, and the defendant filed each appeal against them, and the court decided to consolidate the above two appeals cases.
However, since the first and second judgment's crimes against the defendant are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, one punishment should be imposed pursuant to Article 38 (1) of the Criminal Act, the first and second judgment's judgment cannot be maintained as it is.
However, despite the above reasons for ex officio reversal, the defendant's assertion of mental disability is still subject to the judgment of this court, and this is examined.
The following facts can be recognized by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below regarding the claim for mental disability.