The part of the judgment of the court of first instance and the judgment of the court of second instance shall be reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a year.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. As to the judgment of the court of first instance (the defendant and the respondent for medical treatment and custody) (hereinafter referred to as the "defendants").

1) The first instance court’s sentence (10 months of imprisonment) in part of the Defendant’s case is too unreasonable and unfair. 2) The Defendant was in a state of mental disorder at the time of each of the instant crimes, but at the present time, the symptoms of mental disorder, such as not being returned, are not serious, and the Defendant was under medical treatment and custody. Thus, it is unreasonable to put the Defendant on the part of the medical treatment and custody.

B. On the second instance judgment, the sentence (two years of suspended sentence for one year of imprisonment) of the second instance judgment is too unffortable and unfair.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor ex officio, the court below decided to hold concurrent hearings of the defendant's case and the second instance judgment among the judgment of the court of first instance. Since each of the above judgment of the court below should be sentenced to a single sentence in relation to concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, the part of the judgment of the court of first instance and the judgment of the court of second instance against the defendant should be reversed ex officio.

3. The first instance court determined that the necessity of medical treatment and custody and the risk of recidivism are all recognized in full view of the following: (a) according to the evidence duly examined and adopted by the lower court as well as the statement in the mental appraisal statement, the Defendant may be found to have a mental disorder at the time of the closing of argument in the lower court; and (b) comprehensively taking account of the motive for each of the instant crimes, the form of crime, the Defendant’s legal attitude, and the fact that the Defendant has repeatedly committed similar crimes.

Examining the reasoning of the judgment of the court below in light of the records, the above judgment of the court below is just and acceptable. Thus, this part of the defendant's allegation is without merit.

4. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part concerning the defendant's case and the judgment of the court of second instance are respectively.