절도등
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The Defendant was in a state of mental disability at the time of each of the instant crimes.
B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
2. According to the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below as to the claim of mental retardation, the defendant was hospitalized after being diagnosed with a thief (thief) in the military register at AS Hospital on October 5, 2009, and was punished repeatedly on several occasions in the state of mental disorder resulting from the crime of larceny. In particular, even at the time of each of the crimes in this case, the defendant was under severe stress due to the burden of childcare for three children and the awareness that the disease in this case was aggravated.
According to this, it is reasonable to view that the Defendant was in a state of mental disability caused by mental illness at the time of the instant crime.
Furthermore, even if Article 10(2) of the Criminal Act, which was amended and enforced by Act No. 15982 on December 18, 2018, provides that “the act of a person who lacks the ability to discern things or make decisions due to mental disorder, may be mitigated from punishment,” and has been amended to voluntarily reduce punishment against the act of a person with mental disability, taking into account various circumstances indicated in the records, such as the degree of influence on the instant crime, it is reasonable to apply the statutory mitigation provision under Article 10(2) of the Criminal Act to the instant crime.
3. Since the appeal by the defendant is well-grounded, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the judgment below is ruled as follows.
[Discied Judgment] Summary of facts constituting a crime and evidence recognized by the court, and summary of evidence, are "the defendant is at the fourth level of the judgment of the court below."