The guilty portion shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

(2) the date of this judgment.

A. Defendant 1) At the time of committing each of the instant crimes, Defendant 1 was in a state of having no or weak ability to discern things or make decisions due to mental illness, which was suffering by the Defendant at the time of the instant crimes, and at the time of each of the instant crimes, there was an infringement of unfair legal interests by the Defendant, and the Defendant committed an injury to the victim C and committed an assault against the correctional public official to defend them. As such, the illegality is dismissed as a legitimate defense or legitimate act, and there was no intent to obstruct the performance of official duties.

Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged as to the instant injury and the obstruction of performance of official duties on August 28, 2012. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2) The sentence of the lower court (one hundred months of imprisonment) which is unfair in sentencing is too unreasonable.

B. In full view of the evidence submitted by the Prosecutor 1 on August 31, 2012, the court below found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged because it could be recognized that there was legitimate execution of official duties at the time of the crime interfering with the performance of official duties on August 31, 2012. The court below rendered a verdict of innocence on this part of the facts charged. The court below erred by misunderstanding the facts,

2) The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the records on the Defendant’s mental and physical disorder, mistake of facts, and misapprehension of legal doctrine, the record on the part of the Defendant’s assertion of mental and physical disorder is acknowledged, but the Defendant was suffering from mental disorder, such as ordinary mental disorder or uneasiness. In light of the circumstances leading to each of the instant crimes, method of the crime, the circumstances after the crime, and the Defendant’s behavior at the time of committing each of the instant crimes, the Defendant had no or weak ability to discern things due to the above mental disorder at the

No. 3.