The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 7,500,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. At the time of committing the instant crime, the Defendant was in a state of mental disorder or mental disability due to the decline in recognition function and behavior control capacity.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below and the court below as to the assertion of mental disorder, the defendant was provided medical treatment to S Council members as "the knowledge function, learning ability, behavior coordination ability, and self-management ability degradation" around October 207. At the time, the above hospital was assessed as overall intelligence 47, language intelligence 46, and intelligent 43 in preparation. On around 2010, the defendant was provided medical treatment at T Council members. At the time of the crime of this case, the defendant was assessed as the mental retardation level (total intelligence 51, language intelligence 53, 63). In light of the circumstances leading to the crime of this case, method and method of the crime of this case, the defendant's behavior before and after the crime of this case, circumstances after the crime of this case, etc., it is reasonable to deem that the defendant had the ability to change his ability to determine the recognition function and behavior of this case, or lacks the ability to distinguish things at the time of the crime of this case.

3. If so, the defendant's mental and physical argument is justified. Thus, without examining the argument of unfair sentencing, the judgment of the court below is reversed under Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the following decision is rendered again through pleading

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts charged and the summary of the evidence admitted by the court are as follows: “The defendant does not have the ability to discern things or make decisions due to the decline in recognition function and behavior control” in the criminal facts column, except for addition of “the defendant has the weak ability to discern things or make decisions due to the decline in the ability to recognize and act control,” and therefore, it is identical to the corresponding column of the judgment below.

Application of Statutes

1. Criminal facts;