A. At the time of committing a crime with mental disorder, the Defendant was unable to discern things or make decisions due to intellectual disorder.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court (six months of imprisonment, 40 hours of order to complete the course, and 3 years of employment restriction order) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The fact that the Defendant’s judgment on the assertion of mental disorder has a class 2 intellectual disability is recognized.

However, in light of the circumstances leading to the instant crime, the means and methods of the crime, and the circumstances before and after the crime, the Defendant had the ability to discern things or make decisions due to intellectual disability at the time of the crime.

It is difficult to see this part of the defendant's argument.

B. The Criminal Procedure Act, which takes the trial-oriented principle and direct principle as to the determination of sentencing, has the inherent area of the first instance judgment regarding the determination of sentencing. As such, in a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance judgment, and the first instance judgment does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect such a case (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). In light of the foregoing legal doctrine, the Health Board and the Defendant, even in the lower court, submitted relevant materials by asserting that the Defendant’s intellectual disability was the cause of sentencing, and thus, the circumstance in which the Defendant alleged as an unfair cause of sentencing was already reflected in the lower judgment’s sentencing is deemed to have already been reflected in the lower court’s sentencing, and there is no new circumstance or special change in circumstances to be reflected in the sentencing after the lower court’s sentencing, and other circumstances that form the conditions of the sentencing recorded in the records and pleadings in the instant case, including the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive, means and consequence, and consequence of the crime.

shall not be deemed to exist.

3. Conclusion.