Defendant

The appeal filed by both the requester for medical treatment and custody, the requester for attachment order and the prosecutor shall be dismissed.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

A. Part 1 of the defendant's case) The defendant and the requester for medical treatment and custody, and the requester for attachment order (hereinafter "defendants").

(A) The Defendant alleged misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles has committed the instant crime in the state of mental disorder caused by a mental division.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged on the premise that the crime of this case was in a state of mental disability is erroneous and erroneous.

B) The lower court’s judgment’s allegation of unfair sentencing (one-eight years of imprisonment, confiscation) is too unreasonable and unfair. 2) The Prosecutor’s assertion of unfair sentencing is too unreasonable and unfair.

B. It is improper for the lower court to dismiss the Defendant’s request for an attachment order of an electronic device requested by the Defendant.

2. Determination on the part of the defendant's case

A. According to the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court as to the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal doctrine, the Defendant merely was in a state of mental disorder at the time of committing the instant crime, and cannot be deemed to have suffered a state of mental disorder without the ability to discern things or make decisions.

Therefore, we cannot accept this part of the defendant's assertion.

① While the Defendant made a statement at an investigative agency, he/she consistently and consistently made a statement in detail, on the grounds that he/she had a knife used in the instant crime, the developments leading up to the receipt of military uniforms that he/she sustained at the time of the commission of the crime, the process of leading the victim to the scene of the crime, the situation where

The clinical Doctors of the National Legal Hospital of the Ministry of Justice, who conducted the mental sentiment of the defendant, also expressed the opinion that "the consciousness of the defendant is clear and excellent." It does not appear in terms of cognitive imbalance, inefficiency, or infinite recognition function."

According to the Defendant’s statement and the expert’s opinion.