beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
Summary of Grounds for Appeal
Although the defendant of mental disability committed the crime in this case under the state that he/she lacks the ability to discern things or make decisions due to the mental retardation, it is unreasonable for the court below to accept it.
The sentence of unfair sentencing (four years of imprisonment) by the lower court is too unreasonable.
Judgment
The existence of mental disorder under Article 10 of the Criminal Act as to the claim for mental disorder is a legal issue to be judged by the court in light of the purpose, etc. of the punishment system. In such judgment, the result of the mental diagnosis of the professional appraiser is an important reference material. However, the court is not bound by the opinion, but must independently determine the existence of mental disorder by taking into account not only the result of such appraisal but also all the materials on the records, such as the background of the crime, means, the defendant's behavior
(1) The Defendant and his defense counsel’s assertion are not accepted, in light of the following: (a) the Defendant’s existence of a state of mental suffering from a mental retardation, in light of the developments leading up to the instant crime; (b) the details of the instant crime; and (c) the Defendant’s behavior and attitude before and after the instant crime.
It is a favorable sentencing factor such as the fact that the defendant's judgment on the assertion of unfair sentencing is against himself/herself when committing his/her crime, the amount of damage is not significant, and some victims do not want the punishment of the defendant.
However, the defendant was sentenced to three years of imprisonment on January 26, 2007, three years and six months of imprisonment on March 23, 2010, and each of the crimes of this case again within a short period of time even after the execution of the sentence was completed on July 19, 2013. The damage from the crime of this case was not recovered, and other arguments of this case, such as character and conduct, environment, family relationship, motive for the crime, means and consequence of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc.