The judgment of the court below is reversed.

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

1. The court below dismissed the prosecution of assault among the facts charged and sentenced the remainder of the facts charged.

Defendant

Only the part of the judgment below which dismissed the public prosecution by filing an appeal on the conviction shall be excluded from the object of the judgment of this court.

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. At the time of each of the crimes of this case, the Defendant was physically and physically in a state of mental weakness.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (one hundred months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

3. Ex officio determination is made. Although each of the crimes of this case is not a repeated crime, the lower court erred by aggravated aggravation of a repeated crime against each of the crimes of this case pursuant to Article 35 of the Criminal Act, so the lower judgment cannot be maintained as it is.

However, the defendant's argument of mental and physical weakness is still subject to the judgment of this court despite the above reasons for reversal of authority, and this is examined below.

4. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court regarding the assertion of mental and physical weakness, the Defendant was in a state that the Defendant had the ability to discern things or make decisions at the time of committing each of the instant crimes, due to Cho Jae-in illness.

I seem to appear.

On the other hand, Article 10(2) of the Criminal Act, which was amended by Act No. 15982 on December 18, 2018, has been enforced, can reduce the punishment of a person who lacks the ability to discern things or make decisions due to mental or physical disorder.

"........"

Therefore, it is found that the defendant committed each of the crimes of this case under mental and physical weakness.

Even if punishment can be voluntarily mitigated, so the lower court erred by the mere fact that the lower court did not have any legal mitigation due to mental and physical weakness against the Defendant, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

subsection (b) of this section.

Ultimately, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

5. The judgment of the court below is examined above.