The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. At the time of committing the instant crime, the Defendant was in a state of mental and physical loss or mental weakness due to a mental disorder.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (one hundred months of imprisonment) is excessively unreasonable.

2. As to the assertion of mental disorder, first of all, in light of the following: (a) the motive and background leading up to the instant crime, the means and method of the commission of the crime; and (b) the detailed details of the crime; and (c) the Defendant’s attitude and statement in the court of the trial at the time of the instant crime; and (b) the Defendant was in a state that, at the time of the instant crime, the Defendant had a lack of ability to discern things or make decisions

may be appointed by a person.

Therefore, the lower court, which did not grant statutory mitigation due to mental and physical weakness, erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment. Therefore, the Defendant’s above assertion is with merit.

(3) The defendant's appeal is justified. Thus, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the defendant's argument that the sentencing of the defendant is unfair, and the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with the above Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act and the defendant's argument that the sentencing is unfair, without proceeding to decide it, is again decided as follows.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts constituting the crime and the evidence admitted by this court is as follows: (a) the first head of the facts constituting the crime of the judgment of the court below, with the exception of adding “the defendant is in a state where the right to distinguish things or lacks the ability to make decisions due to a mental fissionation,” and “1. The defendant’s statement in the trial room is identical to each corresponding column of the reasons of the judgment of the court below, and thus, it is acceptable in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act

Application of Statutes

1. Criminal facts;