The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. At the time of each of the instant crimes, the Defendant was in a state of mental health and physical disability, where the Defendant did not distinguish between reality and elblue due to mental fissionation.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the court below's determination as to mental suffering is acknowledged, but it is clear that the defendant suffered from mental fission, while the defendant's motive is for his livelihood, and the stolen product also conforms to the motive of the crime; the defendant used a method by which people can search the same place where people can easily conceal the keys to intrude into another's residence, etc.; and the defendant's "It is not true that he does not memory about the case". "The defendant argued to the purport that he is not guilty of the crime before and after the crime of this case, but clearly memorys the situation before and after the crime of this case, and makes a concrete and consistent statement at the investigative agency (the defendant voluntarily stated the crime against the victim C, I, and L while working at the investigative agency as a crime against the victim E). The defendant's mental fission was recognized as a mental disorder in the case of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, but it was not recognized as a mental disorder at the time of the defendant's testimony or decision of mental disorder.

B. The defendant's previous convictions, including punishment, and the fact that the defendant did not agree with the victims is disadvantageous. However, the defendant himself/herself.