The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Provided, That the above punishment shall be imposed for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. A. The Defendant suffered from a well-known disease, and the Defendant committed this case under a state of mental disability.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. In full view of the following circumstances and the circumstances leading to the instant crime, specific methods of crime, and circumstances after the crime, which can be revealed in accordance with the judgment of the court below and the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below as to the claim of mental disability, the Defendant is deemed to have committed the instant crime under the condition that the Defendant is deemed to have committed the instant crime under the lack of ability to discern things or make decisions due to mental illness, such as inhuman mental illness, and other depressions, such as depression and depression

Therefore, this part of the defendant's argument is justified.

1) On September 27, 2016, the Defendant: (a) was fluencing with the G Mental Department; (b) was diagnosed with a stery disorder; (c) was conducted several occasions of outpatient treatment; (d) was conducted on July 10, 2017; (b) was conducted drug treatment; and (c) was issued with a written request for treatment at a H Hospital; (c) the Defendant was receiving treatment at the I Hospital before the instant case; and (d) the Defendant was receiving mental treatment at the I Hospital before the instant case; and (e) was subject to treatment four times from October 30, 2018 to November 26, 2018 in detail after the instant case, the Defendant received treatment at the I Hospital by undergoing a mixed-patic mental disease, or other fluoral disease diagnosis, and was recommended to undergo treatment at the I Hospital on four occasions.

3) The Defendant also talks about the mother-child and the siblings, such as “I have to go away and drive away.” The Defendant’s assertion of mental disability is with merit. 3. Thus, the Defendant’s assertion of unfair sentencing is reversed pursuant to Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act without further proceeding to decide on the allegation of unfair sentencing, and is again decided as follows. The reasoning of the judgment below and the summary of evidence are as follows.