beta
Text
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.
However, the above punishment shall be imposed for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final.
Reasons
1. The decision of the court below on the summary of the reasons for appeal (4 months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
2. The instant crime was committed by the Defendant by thefting one smell in Maart. It is also true that the Defendant was punished by a fine from around 2015, and the Defendant continued to have committed the instant crime of larceny, even though he/she was sentenced to a suspended sentence of one year for imprisonment with prison labor for larceny, etc. on October 28, 2016, and committed the instant crime of the same kind during the grace period, even though he/she was sentenced to a suspended sentence of one year for imprisonment with prison labor for larceny, etc. in support of Sungnam branch of Suwon branch of Suwon branch of Suwon branch of the Republic of Korea.
However, it seems that the defendant recognized the crime of this case and divided his mistake, the defendant compensated for all damages caused by the thief of this case, the defendant seems to have been an opportunity to have clear awareness of the seriousness of repeated thief by life of about one month or more caused by this case, and the defendant suffers from the disease of shocking impulse and its shock disorder caused thereby, and this seems to have affected the repetition of the thief of this crime. It seems that the defendant himself expresses his active treatment intention and has a firm intention to support the defendant's parents. It is more reasonable to give the defendant an opportunity for long-term hospital treatment under the appropriate protection and supervision of his parents rather than the treatment in the confinement facility for the basic removal of the possibility of recidivism.
Considering other circumstances that are the conditions for sentencing as shown in the record, such as the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, relationship with the victim, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable.
3. According to the conclusion, the defendant's appeal is reasonable, and Article 364 of the Criminal Procedure Act is applicable.