A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Seized evidence No. 1 shall be confiscated.

A. A. The Defendant was in a state of mental disability at the time of the instant crime, such as receiving mental and medical treatment due to harmful use of a volatile organic solvent, etc., and the lower court neglected this.

B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (one hundred months of imprisonment, confiscation) is too unreasonable.

2. According to the records of the determination on the claim of mental retardation, the defendant was punished for inhaled dysty over the past several times, and the defendant appears to have been diagnosed as having weak ability or decision-making ability to discern things due to the above sustainability disorder, etc., on the ground that the defendant appears to have reached the crime of this case in a state where he lacks ability to discern things or make decisions with weak ability to discern things due to the above sustainability disorder.

3. According to the conclusion, the defendant's appeal is reasonable, and the judgment of the court below is reversed under Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the argument of unfair sentencing, and it is again decided as follows.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts constituting the crime and the summary of the evidence acknowledged by this court are as follows. The defendant of the court below's 4 criminal facts in the crime of the court below revised "the defendant" as "the defendant lacks the ability to discern things or make decisions due to the sustainability disorder, etc." The summary of the evidence added "1. A diagnosis letter of intention G preparation" to "1. The summary of the evidence is the same as that of each corresponding column of the court below. Thus, it is accepted in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1..