beta
Text
The judgment below
The part of the defendant's case shall be reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for ten years.
Attached Form.
Reasons
1. As to the part of the Defendant’s case, the lower court rendered a judgment dismissing the prosecutor’s request regarding the part of the case, and as to the case of the attachment order, only the Defendant appealed, there is no benefit of appeal regarding the part of the attachment order case.
Therefore, Article 9(8) of the Act on Probation and Electronic Monitoring, Etc. of Specific Criminal Offenders does not apply (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 82Do2476, Dec. 14, 1982; 201Do6705, 201Do20, Aug. 25, 2011); and the part regarding attachment order case is excluded from the scope of the trial of this court.
2. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The Defendant, who was suffering from mental illness, was under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the murder in this case, was in a state of mental disorder because he inhaled to the dys that contain a halluous substance, and was in a state of mental disorder.
B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (10 years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
3. Although the defendant is relatively sponsing the situation before and after the crime of murder in this case, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the court below, and reference materials submitted by the defense counsel, namely, ① the defendant inhaled the main body containing hallucinogenic substances under drinking, and murdered the victim at the time of the crime of murder in this case, ② the defendant stated that he was aware of the situation at the time of the crime of murder in this case consistently from the beginning of the investigation, and the reason why the defendant inhaled the main body is, the defendant was not a victim at the first stage of the investigation, and the defendant was not a victim at the first stage of the crime of murder in this case, and even if he was sprinked by force, the defendant found the main body of the defendant so that he could not dphered the main body because he could not dphere the main body.”