1. In full view of the facts leading up to the instant case’s crime, the method of crime, the behavior of the Defendant and the candidate for medical treatment and custody (hereinafter “Defendant”) before and after the instant crime, and the circumstances after the instant crime, etc., the Defendant cannot be deemed to have existed in the state of mental disorder at the time of committing the instant crime. Therefore, the allegation in the grounds of appeal purporting that the lower court erred by not recognizing the

In addition, under Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment or imprisonment without prison labor for not less than ten years has been imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed. Thus, in this case where a more minor sentence has been imposed on the defendant, the argument that the sentencing of

2. Examining the records in light of the records on the medical treatment and custody claim, the court below's decision that maintained the first instance court that declared the defendant's medical treatment and custody since the defendant needs to receive medical treatment at the medical treatment and custody facility and the risk of recidivism is just and there is no

3. Therefore, all appeals are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.