The judgment of the court below is reversed.

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

except that, for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Since the Defendant was a mentally ill-minded state due to mental illness at the time of the instant crime, punishment should be mitigated.

B. The sentence of imprisonment (eight months of imprisonment) imposed by the court below on the defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The mental disorder stipulated in Article 10 of the Criminal Act regarding the assertion of mental disorder is a biological element, and needs to be judged that the mental disorder, such as mental illness or abnormal mental condition, is lacking or reduced in the ability to discern things due to such mental disorder as a psychological element, so even if a person with mental disorder is a person with mental disability, he/she cannot be deemed a mental disorder if he/she had normal ability to discern things or control behavior at the time of committing the crime (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Do7900, Feb. 8, 2007). In light of the process and method of committing the instant crime, the behavior and method of the accused before and after the instant crime, the statement of the victims, and the video of boombox, etc., it cannot be deemed that the Defendant had lacking the ability or decision-making ability to discern things at the time of committing the instant crime.

Therefore, the defendant's argument of mental disability is without merit.

B. As to the assertion of unfair sentencing, the Defendant has interfered with the business of the bus company by inflicting an injury on two victims within the bus and destroying the bus, and the nature of the crime is very poor.

The time of the instant crime is not shorter than the time, and the degree of injury cannot be deemed to be light.

The court below asserted that it was self-defense and denied the crime.

However, it is against the defendant's recognition of the crime in the trial, and the victims have agreed to both.

In full view of the above circumstances and the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, all of the sentencing conditions shown in the arguments are examined.