All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. At the time of the instant crime, the Defendant was in a state of weak ability to discern things or make decisions due to shock disorder, hearing disorder, and intellectual disability, etc.

B. The sentence of each of the lower courts’ rulings on the Defendant’s unfair sentencing (the first instance court’s sentence: imprisonment of 1 year and 6 months, and 2 months: imprisonment of 8 months) is too unreasonable.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal ex officio, the defendant filed an appeal against the judgment of the court below, and this court decided to consolidate each of the above appeals cases. Each of the offenses committed by the judgment below against the defendant is related to concurrent offenses under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and one of the offenses is to be sentenced within the scope of punishment aggravated for concurrent offenses under Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. Thus, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained as it is.

However, despite the above reasons for ex officio reversal in the judgment below, the defendant's assertion of mental or physical disability is still subject to the judgment of this court.

3. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court regarding the Defendant’s claim of mental disability, the fact that the Defendant was a person with hearing disability 2 and intellectual disability 3 may be acknowledged. However, in light of the fact that the Defendant was planned to commit some crimes, such as preparing for the commission of the crime, and that the Defendant is relatively detailed memory with regard to the background of the crime in this case and the circumstances before and after the commission of the crime, it cannot be deemed that the aforementioned circumstance alone was in a state where the Defendant had the ability to discern things or make decisions due to mental or physical disorder at the time of the crime

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

4. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, since the above grounds for reversal of authority as above exist.