The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

Article 4(1) of the Medical Treatment and Custody Act provides that "A prosecutor may file a request for medical treatment and custody with the competent court where a person subject to medical treatment and custody needs to receive medical treatment and custody," and Article 4(7) of the same Act provides that "the court may request a prosecutor to file a request for medical treatment and custody when it deems it necessary to receive medical treatment and custody

In light of the form of the provision, etc., it cannot be deemed that Article 4(7) of the Medical Treatment and Custody Act imposes an obligation on a court to request a medical treatment and custody application (see Supreme Court Decision 2006Do4211, Sept. 14, 2006). Thus, even if the Defendant has a habitor about medication of psychotropic drugs, as alleged in the grounds of appeal, the lower court did not err by failing to request a prosecutor to request a medical treatment and custody application by performing a mental

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.