A. A. Mental and physical disorder (De Facto mistake or misunderstanding of legal principles) had no or weak ability to discern things or make decisions due to the proof of alcohol content, etc. at the time of committing the instant crime

(B) The crime of this case is committed under the state of mental disorder and thus wishes to receive medical treatment and custody.

The punishment sentenced by the court below on the defendant (two months of imprisonment, additional collection) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the records on the assertion of mental and physical disorder, the fact that the defendant was receiving medical treatment due to alcohol use dependence, etc. (as stated in the records of trial) may be acknowledged (as stated in the records of trial). However, in light of the police and the prosecutor’s office’s statements, it appears that the defendant specifically memorys the situation at the time of committing the instant crime, motive, etc., and considering the circumstances leading to the instant crime, the means and method of committing the instant crime, and the circumstances after committing the instant crime, the defendant did not have the ability to discern things

Since it seems that the defendant was in a state or weak condition, the above argument of the defendant's mental disorder is rejected.

On the other hand, although the defendant wishes to receive medical treatment and custody, Article 4(1) of the Medical Treatment and Custody Act provides that "a prosecutor may file a request for medical treatment and custody with the competent court where a person subject to medical treatment and custody needs to receive medical treatment and custody." Thus, a court may not declare medical treatment and custody unless a prosecutor

[2] Article 4(7) of the Medical Treatment and Custody Act provides that “The court may request a prosecutor to file a request for medical treatment and custody when it deems it appropriate to place a person subject to medical treatment and custody as a result of the examination of a prosecuted case.” In light of the form of the provision, etc., Article 4(7) of the Medical Treatment and Custody Act cannot be deemed as imposing an obligation on a court to file