2017Do1213 homicide

2017do3 (Joint Medical Treatment and Custody)

2017do8 (Joint Attachment Orders)

Persons subject to medical treatment and custody and persons subject to attachment order;

A person shall be appointed.

Defendant and Applicant for medical treatment and custody and respondent for attachment order

Attorney CB (State Ship)

Seoul High Court Decision 20163297, 2016No68 (Joint) decided January 12, 2017;

2016 Jeonno218 (Joint Judgment)

April 13, 2017

All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Defendant case

In light of various circumstances, such as the circumstances leading up to each of the instant crimes, the method of committing the crimes, the behavior of the Defendant and the requester for medical treatment and custody as well as the requester for an attachment order (hereinafter “Defendant”) before and after the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., which can be revealed by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court and the first instance court, the Defendant merely appeared to have been in a state of mental and physical disability and did not appear to have been in a state of mental disorder beyond that of the Defendant at the time of committing the instant crime. It is justifiable for the lower court to have rejected the Defendant’s assertion on the cause of mental disorder on the grounds of the

In addition, considering various circumstances, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, relationship with victims, motive, means, and consequence of each of the instant crimes, and the circumstances after the crime, the determination of the lower court’s imprisonment with prison labor for a period of 30 years is extremely unfair even when considering the circumstances asserted in the grounds of appeal.

2. As to the medical treatment and custody claim and the request for attachment order

When a defendant files an appeal against a prosecuted case, the appeal is deemed to have been filed regarding the medical treatment and custody case and the case requesting an attachment order. However, the appellate brief does not state the grounds for appeal and the appellate brief does not contain any statement of grounds for appeal.

3. Conclusion

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

Justices Park Sang-ok

Justices Kim Jae-tae

Justices Jo Hee-de