The judgment of the court below is reversed.

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

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In so determining, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine and by misapprehending the rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

In addition, the defendant committed the crime of this case in a state of mental or physical loss or mental weakness.

B. The punishment of the lower court (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The prosecutor of the judgment ex officio requested the defendant to amend the Bill of Amendment to the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a group, deadly weapon, etc.) in the name of the defendant in the trial of the court. Since the court permitted the above, the part concerning the violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a group, deadly weapon, etc.) in the judgment of the court below can no longer be maintained.

B. As the remaining criminal facts and concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, the entire judgment of the court below cannot be reversed.

However, notwithstanding the above reasons for reversal ex officio, the defendant's misunderstanding of the legal principles and his argument about mental and physical disorder still are subject to the judgment of this court, which will be examined below.

3. In the judgment of the court below on the misapprehension of legal principles and the assertion of mental and physical disorder, it cannot be found that there was an error of violation of the Constitution, laws, orders, or rules, or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

In addition, in light of various circumstances, such as the background of the instant crime, the conduct before and after the instant crime, and the means and method of the instant crime, which were duly adopted and examined by the lower court, the Defendant did not have or lacks the ability to discern things at the time of the instant crime.