The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. At the time of the instant case, the Defendant was in a state of mental disorder having no capacity to discern things or make decisions due to the de facto illness on the network.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which rejected the defendant's assertion of mental disorder is erroneous in misconception of facts or misapprehension of legal principles.

B. In fact-finding, the Defendant did not go out of the room from April 5, 2019 to 04:00, from 10:30 on the same day to 11:30 on the same day, and there was no fact of intimidation against the victim G and I.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below that found this part of the facts charged guilty is erroneous by misunderstanding facts and affecting the judgment.

C. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the court below's decision and the evidence duly admitted and examined by this court, the defendant appears to have suffered symptoms, such as patriarch and patriarch, etc., but in light of the method and frequency of the crime, the statement attitude at the time of arrest, etc., it is difficult to view that the defendant, at the time of the crime of this case, was unable to change things or lose his ability to make a decision beyond a mental and physical disorder, beyond a mental disorder.

Therefore, the defendant's argument of defectiveness is not accepted.

B. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the charges on this part, on the following grounds: (a) comprehensively taking account of the circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, that the Defendant threatened the victim G from April 5, 2019 to 04:00; and (b) by taking advantage of each item, which is a dangerous object between 10:30 on April 5, 201 and 11:30 on April 5, 2019, and by threatening the victim I.

In light of the records of this case, the judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and there is a mistake of fact as alleged by the defendant.