The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

When committing each of the crimes in this case, the defendant was in a state that the mental retardation lacks the ability to discern things or make decisions.

The court below's sentence of unfair sentencing (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

The judgment of the court below as to the claim of mental disability was duly adopted and investigated in the evidence, namely, ① the defendant was sentenced to imprisonment for two years and six months in the case of the Gwangju High Court 2007No111 on July 12, 207 and violated the Act on the Punishment of Sexual Crimes and the Protection of Victims (Rape, etc. under thirteen years of age). ② the defendant at that time received a final appraisal from the Public Medical Treatment and Custody Center in the Ministry of Justice on June 22, 2007 that “the defendant is in a mental state of 55 degrees, and this cannot be expected as treatment,” ③ there is a interval between the above judgment and each crime of this case, but it is difficult to view that the mental state of the defendant was recovered during the above period in light of the defendant’s statement and attitude in this court and the result of the appraisal under the above paragraph. The defendant's argument in this case is reasonable.

Thus, the defendant's mental and physical argument is reasonable. Thus, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the argument of unfair sentencing, and the judgment below is again decided as

[However, since the expression of the judgment of the court below in the case is obvious that the "323" is a clerical error, it shall be corrected by ex officio pursuant to Article 25 (1) of the Regulations on Criminal Procedure. The summary of the facts constituting an offense and evidence recognized by the court is the first head of the facts constituting an offense in the judgment of the court below, and the defendant shall make a decision on the ability or intention to discern things due to mental retardation.