The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

However, the above punishment for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, with mental disorder, committed the instant crime under the disability of shocking due to the wall. As such, the Defendant was physically, mentally, or physically and mentally deprived at the time of committing the instant crime.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (4 months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Determination 1 on the assertion of mental disorder 1) The phenomenon that leads to the crime committed on account of his/her failure to suppress his/her impulse can be found to be far from the normal person. Barring any special circumstance, it cannot be said that a person with the above character defect requires an act that cannot be expected to restrain his/her impulse and to demand compliance with the law, and thus, it is reasonable to deem that, in principle, the defect of character, such as a disorder, does not constitute a mental disorder, which is the reason for the reduction or exemption of punishment.

However, if a mental disease within the original meaning that impedes the ability to discern things more than that, or even if the cause of the disorder is the same as that of the impulse, even if it is very serious and it can be evaluated that the cause of the disorder is equal to that of the person with mental disorder within the original meaning, the crime of larceny resulting therefrom shall be deemed to constitute a crime of larceny (see Supreme Court Decision 2002Do1541, May 24, 2002, etc.). (See Supreme Court Decision 2002Do1541, May 24, 2002, etc.).

Although the appeal is lodged by the Defendant, it is not considered that the appeal is a de facto and consistent restitution, and it is not considered that the appeal is a de facto restitution, and even during the period of attracting appraisal, the appeal was not observed at all, and even if there was a net restitution.

Even if there is no problem in reality verification, it has been appraised to the effect that it is not mental or physical weakness or loss.