The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

However, the above punishment for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Fact misunderstanding [the part concerning the violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. against Victims F (Intimidation with a collective deadly weapon, etc.)] Defendant did not have the criminal intent of intimidation at the time of showing excessive amount to the victim F.

B. At the time of each of the instant crimes, the Defendant had weak ability to discern things or make decisions due to mental illness.

(c)

The sentence (10 months of imprisonment, confiscation) sentenced by the court below against the defendant is too unreasonable.

2. We examine ex officio prior to judgment on the grounds for ex officio appeal.

In the first instance court, the prosecutor changed “Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act” from among the names of the crimes to “special assault,” and “Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a collective deadly weapon, etc.)” to “special intimidation,” and ② In the applicable law, “Articles 3(1) and 2(1)1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, and Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act” in “Articles 261 and 260(1) of the Criminal Act,” “Articles 3(1)1 and 2(1) of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act,” “Article 284 and Article 283(1) of the Criminal Act,” and “Article 283(1) of the Criminal Act,” and “Article 284 and 283(1) of the Criminal Act, the court of the lower judgment was no longer authorized to amend the contents of the amendment to the indictment, thereby making it impossible for the court to grant permission.”

However, notwithstanding the above reasons for reversal ex officio, the defendant's misunderstanding of facts and argument about mental or physical weakness is still subject to the judgment of this court, and it will be below.

3. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts, at the time of the instant case, the Defendant, at the time of the instant case, brought a dispute with the victim F to the point of passing along the road, brought an excessive amount in the process, and the victim F, who was driving away about about 20 meters away from the victim F, is recognized.

The above act by the defendant is the first time between the defendant and the defendant.