A person with a fixed mental illness, such as elements for recognizing mental disorder as prescribed in Article 10 of the Criminal Act and a certificate of mental fission, seems to be in the same state as the normal person in the process of committing a crime and causing a impulse to commit a crime, but there is room to regard him/her as a mental disorder.

The mental disorder stipulated in Article 10 of the Criminal Act is a biological factor and needs to be determined as lacking or reduced in the ability to distinguish things due to mental disorder other than mental disorder such as mental, mental or abnormal mental condition. Thus, even if a person with mental disorder was a person with normal mental disorder or the ability to control acts at the time of committing a crime, he cannot be deemed a mental disorder if he had normal ability to distinguish things or ability to control acts. However, in the case of a fixed mental disorder such as mental disorder, even if the person with mental disorder seems to have the same mental disorder as normal ability at the time of committing a crime, it is common that he could not suppress the impulse of committing a crime even if he seems to have the same mental disorder in the process of causing a crime. In such a case, there is room to regard him as a mental disorder as a mental disorder.

Article 10 of the Criminal Act

Defendant

Defendant

Attorney Yoon Young-young

Seoul High Court Decision 92No1198 delivered on May 15, 1992

The judgment below is reversed and the case is remanded to Seoul High Court.

Defendant’s defense counsel’s grounds of appeal

1. The criminal facts of the defendant acknowledged by the court of first instance are that the defendant, who was an employee of the court of first instance, tried to take a meal as the defendant in his judgment and at the same time on the grounds that he wanted to return to the next time even after receiving a time rate. The defendant's maximum holiday was 34cm in the inside machine in the length of the defendant who was in possession of the 34cm cm with the above cafeteria, and the victim's shoulder (72 years old), who was in the above cafeteria, knife the above knife in order to prevent and stop the defendant's street and stop the above victim's left shoulder, the left part, such as the left shoulder, left side, etc., are dead due to the mental and physical disorder of the defendant at the hospital around 11:20 on the same day, and the court below determined that the defendant's mental disorder or his behavior was not legitimate before and after the defendant's examination of the crime in this case's mental disorder or mental disorder.

2. However, mental disorder as stipulated under Article 10 of the Criminal Act is a biological element, and it is commonly related to a mental disorder that does not suppress the impulse of a crime, even if a person with mental disorder has normal ability to distinguish things or control action at the time of committing the crime, and even if a person with mental disorder seems to have the ability to control action at the time of committing the crime, it cannot be viewed as a mental disorder. However, in the case of a fixed mental disorder such as mental disorder, even if the person with mental disorder seems to have the same mental disorder as the normal ability to distinguish things or control action, it is often related to a mental disorder, and in such a case, it is often likely to be regarded as a mental disorder because the mental disorder affected the ability to control action due to mental disorder.

According to the records, the defendant, who was suffering from a dynamic mental flive disease on October 28, 1983 and was subject to medical treatment and custody disposition by December 5, 199 on the ground that he murdered his wife. In addition, in the prosecution investigation on this case, the defendant was unable to see that he did not make a knife knife and knife his own knife because he wanted to die while she was about three months before she was at the same time, and that he did not have a knife knife and knife his knife and tried to interview the above person, but he did not know that he did not have a knife knife knife his knife and knife his knife and did not have a knife that he did not have a knife his own mental sense.

In light of the above facts, the defendant is a person with mental disorder of the network mental fission, who did not suppress the impulse of the crime at the time of the crime, and caused the crime. Even though the impulse of the defendant was not directly attributable to the above symptoms of the mental illness, it is reasonable to say that the defendant's mental disorder constitutes the cause of the reduction of the ability to control the act, if the defendant does not have the ability to control the crime due to mental disorder, even though he was unable to suppress the impulse of the crime (the defendant stated that he was under the influence of alcohol at the prosecutor's office).

Although the court below should have judged whether the defendant was suffering from mental illness not only the alcohol but also the mental disease of which the defendant was suffering, the court below should have determined whether the defendant was suffering from mental illness without the name, and the above decision without the name was made by the court below and the decision was made by the court below, which affected the conclusion of the judgment through insufficient deliberation. The grounds for the argument are as follows.

3. Therefore, we reverse and remand the judgment of the court below. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Song Man-man (Presiding Justice)