A. Although the defendant, by mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, has received self-refluences as to each of the crimes in paragraphs (1) and (b) of Article 2 of the judgment of the court below, the court below did not recognize the number of self-confluences as to each of the above crimes.

B. The Defendant alleged mental disability was in a state of mental health and physical disability due to the detention at the time of each crime under paragraph (1) of the judgment of the court below.

C. The lower court’s imprisonment (three years and six months of imprisonment) on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, the lower court determined, based on the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, that: (i) in the case of the crime set forth in paragraph (c) of Article 2 of the judgment of the lower court, the Defendant voluntarily revealed the facts of the crime to a police officer on November 27, 2013; and (ii) made a statement to recognize the crime even at the time of interrogation conducted on November 28, 2013, the following day (the first trial records, the first trial records, the first trial records; the third trial records; the third trial records prepared by a judicial police officer; the third trial records; the investigation records prepared by a judicial police officer; the 179 pages). However, it is reasonable to recognize that the Defendant voluntarily surrendered the crime as a reason for reduction of punishment in light of the fact that the Defendant committed other crimes; (iii) as to each of the crimes set forth in paragraphs (a) and (b) of Article 2 of the judgment of the lower court, it is difficult to recognize that the Defendant first made a confession of the suspect interrogation protocol of the first 17th trial records.

This judgment of the court below.