Where the defendant stated in court that he/she was unable to know his/her crime at the time of the crime, a summary of the judgment thereon.

If the defendant has made a statement in court to the effect that he would not know about his criminal act while under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the crime, such statement shall be deemed a statement of the fact that is legal grounds barring the formation of the crime or fact that is grounds for the reduction or exemption of punishment. Therefore, if such statement is made, the

Article 323 of the Criminal Procedure Act

64Do688 delivered on January 19, 1965 (Supreme Court Decision 3863 delivered on November 19, 1965, Supreme Court Decision 323(21)1460 of the Criminal Procedure Act)

Defendant

Defendant

Gangnam branch court of the Chuncheon District Court of the first instance (75 Gohap4,000)

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four years.

70 days from the detention days before the sentence of the original judgment shall be included in the above sentence.

The summary of the grounds for appeal by the defendant is as follows: first, although the defendant was under drinking only at the time of the crime of this case and did not have the ability to discern things, the court below found the defendant guilty; second, the court below erred in misunderstanding of facts affecting the judgment; second, the judgment of the court below against the defendant is too unreasonable.

However, prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal above, it is clear by the court below's ex officio examination that the defendant made a statement to the effect that he would not know about his crime by taking the alcohol at the time of the crime of this case. Such a statement is a statement of facts that are the grounds for denying the establishment of crime by law or that are the grounds for reduction of or exemption from punishment. If there is such a statement, it should be clearly stated that the judgment should be made, but it is clear by the court below's own decision that the court below did not make any judgment on the above statement.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is erroneous in violation of the law that affected the conclusion of the judgment, and thus, the judgment of the court below shall not be reversed.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below shall be reversed in accordance with Article 364 (2) and (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the members shall be decided again after pleading.

The criminal facts of the defendant recognized as a party member and the summary of the evidence are as shown in each corresponding case of the judgment of the court below, and they are quoted in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

As the court below's judgment falls under Article 259 (1) of the Criminal Act, the defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for not more than four years within the limit of the term of punishment, and 70 days of detention prior to the sentence of the court below shall be included in the above punishment according to Article 57 of the same Act.

However, the defendant asserts that he committed the crime of this case in a state where he does not have any awareness of drinking much more alcoholic beverage than that of ordinary book in the court below and the trial court. Thus, considering the various evidences duly adopted by the court below (in particular, the suspect interrogation protocol of the defendant and the statement statement of the non-indicted witness as to the non-indicted witness in the preparation of the handling of affairs by judicial police officers and the statement of the non-indicted witness), the defendant under drinking alcohol, but the defendant committed the crime of this case after the crime of this case, but there is no obstacle to the ability to discern things or make decisions. Thus, the above assertion is groundless.

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.

Judges Hong Man Pung (Presiding Judge)