The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

A seized Rater (No. 1) shall be confiscated.

1. According to the statement of the mental appraisal prepared by the P P for the determination of the claim of mental disability and the fact-finding results on the Q Hospital Head and Rat Hospital Head of this court, the Defendant is recognized to have been in a state where the ability to discern things or make decisions was lacking due to mental illness, such as complicationation, etc. at the time of each of the instant crimes. As such, the Defendant shall be mitigated from punishment against the Defendant pursuant to Articles 10(2) and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act.

Unlike this, the judgment of the court below which did not reduce mental illness is erroneous by misunderstanding the fact, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, and it is again decided as follows through pleading.

Punishment of the crime

The facts constituting the crime acknowledged by this court are as follows: The phrase "criminal facts" of the judgment of the court below is as follows, with the exception of adding "the defendant committed each of the following crimes under the state that "the defendant is not capable of discerning things or making decisions due to mental illness, such as complicationation, etc." to the following crimes.

Summary of Evidence

The gist of the evidence presented by this court is as stated in the above "a summary of the evidence" as stated in the judgment of the court below, except where "the defendant's court statement or part of the court statement" in the third part of "the defendant's court statement" is "the defendant's court statement".

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant provisions concerning facts constituting an offense, Articles 97 (1) and 92 (1) of the Cultural Heritage Protection Act (the point of attempted damage to the State-designated cultural heritage), and Article 329 of each Criminal Act; and Article 329 of each Criminal Act;

1. The proviso to Article 35 and the proviso to Article 42 of the Criminal Act for aggravated repeated crimes;

1. Article 10 (2) and Article 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for mitigation of mental disorders;

1. The punishment of Article 37 (former part), Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act shall be the most severe violation of the Cultural Heritage Protection Act.