1. The part of the judgment below regarding the medical treatment and custody application shall be reversed.

2. The request for the treatment and custody of this case is dismissed.

3...

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The part of the case against the Defendant (unlawful order of community service) and the person who was subject to the medical care and custody (hereinafter “Defendant”) have interests in the personal relationship due to stimulative disorder, etc. so it is impossible to carry out the community service order. Therefore, it is unreasonable for the lower court to order the Defendant to provide community service for 80 hours.

B. Since the Defendant has been receiving medical treatment for both dynamic disorder, etc. for the long time, and has been continuously planned to undergo medical treatment in the future, the Defendant is entitled to prevent re-offending even if he/she was admitted to a medical care and custody center and did not undergo medical treatment.

Therefore, it is unreasonable that the court below ordered the defendant to take care of treatment.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant’s assertion that the community service order itself in this case is unfair on the grounds of mental symptoms can be determined in a flexible manner by the competent protective observation office, considering the Defendant’s condition, health condition, etc. at the execution stage. As such, the Defendant’s assertion that the community service order in this case is unfair on the grounds of mental symptoms cannot be accepted.

In addition, even if the defendant's mental health conditions are considered, it does not seem that it would be too excessive to allow the defendant to perform the community service of this case, even if it is considered that the defendant's mental health conditions are considered.

B. 1) The lower court’s determination on the part regarding the medical care and custody claim is based on the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court and the notification of the results of mental appraisal as follows. In other words, the Defendant was diagnosed as a excessive behavioral disorder (ADD) at the second grade of an elementary school and continuously received pharmacologic treatment; the Defendant was diagnosed as a personality disorder, coercion disorder, and bipolar disorder at a hospital at the time of graduation from a high school, and was hospitalized in a hospital several times, and was hospitalized in a mental therapy on July 30, 2015.