The judgment below

Among them, the convictions against Defendant D and E and refusal to restrict and discharge freedom, such as communication.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Determination on Defendant D and E’s grounds of appeal

A. (1) With respect to the violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint confinement), the summary of the facts charged is as follows: (a) Defendant D, and E, jointly with Defendant A, B, C, F, etc., and Defendant D, on January 3, 2013, forced the victim to a X hospital on an emergency transport vehicle and forced the victim to go to the X hospital on January 8, 2013; and (b) Defendant E, jointly with Defendant A, B, and C, detained the victim by hospitalized the victim to the above hospital until January 18, 200; and (c) on January 18, 2013, Defendant E, jointly with Defendant A, B, and C, forced the victim to leave the hospital by force on an emergency vehicle on January 18, 2013 and detained the victim by hospitalized the victim to the above hospital until January 18, 200.

For the reasons indicated in its holding, the court below found the above defendants D and E to be guilty of this part of the charges against the above defendants, on the ground that the medical examination that the defendant D and E's "involuntary hospitalization" is necessary was conducted with the victim's illegal arrest and detention, and the above defendants were conducted without any inspection or evaluation based only on the defendant Eul's statement suspected of rationality, and thus, it cannot be viewed as a diagnosis by a mental health specialist as stipulated in Article 24 of the Mental Health Act that justify compulsory hospitalization by the victim. Therefore, the above defendants' forced hospitalization against the victim's will constitutes a crime of confinement.

(2) However, the lower court’s determination is difficult to accept for the following reasons.

(A) Article 24(1) of the Mental Health Act shall be limited to cases where the director of a mental medical institution, etc. gives consent to two legal guardians of mentally ill persons and the director determined that hospitalization is necessary by a mental health specialist. When hospitalized, the director of the mental medical institution, etc. may hospitalization of the mentally ill person.