The judgment below

Part 1 to 6, 9 through 11 of the judgment shall be reversed.

Nos. 1 through 6, 9 through 9 of the judgment of the defendant.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal explicitly withdrawn the assertion of mistake of facts on the first trial date.

A. The Defendant, who was mentally and physically weak, was under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing each of the crimes set forth in paragraphs 1 through 3 of the lower judgment. At the time of committing each of the crimes set forth in paragraph 10, the sentence should be mitigated on the ground that he was in a state of mental and physical weakness due to the low-blood shock shock rate caused by urology, as he was in a state

B. The punishment that the court below sentenced against the defendant (the crime of Nos. 1 through 6, 9, and 11 of the ruling: Imprisonment with prison labor for three years and six months, and the crime of No. 7 and 8 of the ruling: imprisonment with prison labor for four months) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The mental and physical disorder stipulated in Article 10 of the Criminal Act regarding the assertion of mental and physical weakness requires that the mental disorder, such as mental illness or abnormal mental condition, other than mental disorder, caused by such mental disorder, lacks or reduces the ability to discern things or control action accordingly. Thus, even if a person with mental disorder is a person with a normal mental disorder at the time of committing the crime, he cannot be deemed a mental and physical disorder (see Supreme Court Decision 92Do1425, Aug. 18, 192, etc.). According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, it is insufficient to recognize the fact that the defendant was under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing each crime listed in Articles 1 through 3, and 10 of the facts constituting the crime in the judgment below, but it is not enough to recognize the fact that the defendant was suffering from urology at the time of committing each crime listed in Article 10.

Meanwhile, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence of the court below, that is, at the time of each crime described in paragraphs 1 through 3 of the criminal facts in the judgment below, the defendant found the victim D in the investigative agency to commit each crime, and reported the victim D's escape out of E during the crime, to the police during the crime, and reported the victim D's escape to the police out of E during the crime, and operated the process of driving the victim D's vehicle and driving it to the victim D, or at the time of each crime described in paragraph 10 of the criminal facts in the judgment of the court below.