On November 15, 2013, at around 16:34, the Defendant: (a) thought that the Defendant committed suicide; (b) moved to the subway station located in Yeongdeungpo-gu, Yeongdeungpo-gu, Seoul, Yeongdeungpo-gu, Seoul, without permission; (c) up to 17:49 on the same day.

Since approximately 25,00 V electric currents over the electric poles, the parties involved in the electric field were taking measures to cut off all trains within the electric field in the electric field in order to safely rescue the defendant, the total of 161 trains, which were scheduled to pass through the electric field at the time, was delayed from 10 minutes to 48 minutes for one hour.

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the traffic of trains.

Judgment

A judgment on the existence and degree of mental disorder stipulated in Article 10 of the Criminal Act is not necessarily bound by the opinion of a professional appraiser as a legal judgment, but can be independently determined by the court by comprehensively taking into account various circumstances such as the type and degree of mental illness, motive and circumstance of the crime, means and manner of the crime, the behavior of the defendant before and after the crime, and the degree of

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 99Do1194, Aug. 24, 199; 2007Do3391, Jul. 12, 2007). According to the Defendant’s legal statement, the witness C’s statement in the sixth trial record, each investigation report (the confirmation of the damaged train, train interference report, the confirmation of the place of crime, and the hearing of the contents of damage inflicted on the Korea Railroad Corporation), etc., it is recognized that the Defendant interfered with the traffic of the train as stated in the facts charged.

However, examining the following circumstances recognized by the witness D’s statement, diagnosis, notification of results of mental appraisal, reply to fact-finding, each opinion, duplicate of each medical record, reply of the professional examiner, and sentencing investigation report in light of the aforementioned legal principles, the Defendant examined the following circumstances in light of the aforementioned evidence and the 6th trial record.