The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) At the time of committing the instant crime with mental disorder, the Defendant had mental and physical weakness.

2) The sentence of the lower court (one year of imprisonment and a fine of five million won) which is unfair in sentencing is too unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor: The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. The lower court, ex officio, found the Defendant guilty of charges by conducting a summary trial, and sentenced the Defendant to one year of imprisonment and a fine of five million won.

Although the Defendant stated that he was aware of the facts charged on the first trial date of the lower court, the Defendant was in custody in the custody center at the time, and the written opinion submitted prior to the first trial date is that the Defendant had been living in a mental hospital for a long time and is suffering from depression and uneasiness at all times.

“The Court also stated “.” This is a claim to the effect that there was a mental and physical weakness at the time of committing the instant crime, which constitutes a statement of fact that is the reason for the reduction or exemption of punishment prescribed in Article 323(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and thus, this case does not fall under the subject of a judgment by a simple trial.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained as long as the court below revoked the judgment of the court below which decided to judge in a simple trial in accordance with Article 286-3 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

However, despite the existence of the above reasons for reversal ex officio, the defendant's mental and physical disorder still is subject to the judgment of this court, and this is examined below.

3. The following circumstances revealed in the record of the determination of the assertion of mental or physical disorder, namely, ① the Defendant had been given multiple diagnosis that “the state of “the state of suffering from infeasible infeasible and depression and a state of suffering from a specific personality disorder” before the instant case; ② the Defendant had the record of having been punished several times against the church by committing fraud or larceny under the same law; ③ the Defendant in the instant trial.