beta
Text
Defendant
In addition, the appeal by the candidate for medical treatment and custody is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The sentence (one year of imprisonment) imposed by the lower court on the Defendant and the candidate for medical treatment and custody (hereinafter “Defendant”) is too unreasonable.
B. On February 1, 2010, the Defendant was actively receiving medical treatment and custody at a public medical treatment and custody center after the termination of the medical treatment and custody, and the Defendant was voluntarily present at an investigation agency and a court to undergo an investigation and a trial. Therefore, the Defendant cannot be deemed to have the necessity of medical treatment and custody facilities and the risk of recidivism.
2. Determination
A. In the part of the defendant's case, the defendant committed the crime of this case in a state that the defendant lacks the ability to discern things or make decisions due to the network mental division disease, etc., the defendant most recognized and divided most of the objective facts about the crime of this case, the defendant agreed in E and the court below among the victims of obstruction of business, the defendant agreed in the trial with the victim K, M and the defendant, and the defendant's wife wanting to take a preference against the defendant, etc.
On the other hand, the crime of this case is deemed to have been committed more than once by the defendant entering the workplace of the victims for five times without any particular reason, and obstructing the defendant's business by avoiding disturbance and abusive language, etc. The crime of this case is committed by the police officer who received a report and used his/her chest to put him/her into a elbbow, and the crime is not good, and since the obstruction of the defendant's business continues to be more than 30 minutes to 1 hour and 20 minutes, substantial economic and mental damage has occurred to the victims. The defendant was punished more than once due to the crime of obstruction of business or obstruction of the performance of official business prior to the crime of this case, and the defendant was sentenced more than six months to imprisonment with prison labor for the crime of obstruction of the performance of official business and damage to public goods, and after the execution of the sentence was completed on June 6, 20