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. Although the Defendant committed the instant crime under the condition that he was unable to discern things or make a decision due to his mental retardation, the lower court recognized only the Defendant’s mental retardation and did not recognize the mental retardation, and the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the fact or the defect, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. An ex officio determination prosecutor filed an application for changes in the indictment with the content that added the facts charged against the defendant during the trial, and the court below's decision can no longer be maintained due to changes in the subject of the judgment, and thus the judgment of the court below shall be reversed ex officio.

However, notwithstanding the above reasons for ex officio reversal, the defendant's assertion of the defectiveness is still subject to a trial at the trial at the court, and the following are also examined as well.

3. According to the judgment of the court below and the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of mental disorder, it is recognized that the defendant suffered from the symptoms of the spirit of the Gyeongdo and thereby, the defendant was not able to discern things or make decisions at the time of the crime of this case.

However, in full view of the method of the instant crime and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the Defendant did not seem to have had the ability to discern things or make decisions at the time of each of the instant crimes, and thus, the Defendant’s allegation of defectiveness is without merit.

4. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, and the judgment below is reversed and it is decided as follows through pleading.

[Judgment of multiple times] Criminal Defendant is guilty of a crime on October 2009.