A. Defendant 1) The Defendant committed the instant crime in a state of mental and physical weakness.

2) The sentence of the lower court (a prison term of 17 years, confiscation) is too heavy.

B. Prosecutor: The sentence of the lower court is too minor.

2. Determination

A. In light of various circumstances, such as the background of the instant crime and the conduct before and after the instant crime, and the written appraisal of the formation of a doctor belonging to the Medical Care and Custody Center, recognized by the record as to the Defendant’s mental and physical weakness, the Defendant did not have the ability to discern things at the time of the instant crime, or make decisions.

It does not seem that it does not appear.

B. Determination of unfair sentencing by the Defendant and the Prosecutor on the grounds of statutory penalty is based on the discretionary determination that takes place within a reasonable and appropriate scope, taking into account the factors constituting conditions for sentencing under Article 51 of the Criminal Act, on the basis of statutory penalty.

However, considering the unique area of sentencing of sentencing of the first instance that is respected under the principle of trial priority and the principle of direct jurisdiction taken by our criminal litigation law and the nature of the ex post facto review of the appellate court, the sentencing of sentencing of the first instance was exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion when comprehensively taking into account the factors and guidelines for sentencing specified in the first instance sentencing trial process.

In light of the records newly discovered in the course of the appellate court’s sentencing hearing, it is reasonable to file an unfair judgment of the first instance court, only in cases where it is deemed unfair to maintain the sentencing of the first instance court as it is for the court to judge the sentencing of the first instance court.

Unless there exist such exceptional circumstances, it is desirable to respect the first instance sentencing determination (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The lower court, based on its stated reasoning, declared the above sentence against the Defendant, which is favorable or unfavorable to the sentencing alleged in the trial by the Defendant and the prosecutor.