The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

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

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence of imprisonment (one year and six months, and confiscation) imposed by the court below on the defendant and the requester for medical treatment and custody (hereinafter “defendants”) is too unreasonable.

B. The part of the medical treatment and custody case did not commit any crime while the defendant under the protection of his family. However, the defendant voluntarily suspended medication while living independently and left out, and committed the crime of this case. From the time when the defendant was detained in this case, the situation has rapidly disappeared. Thus, when the defendant under the care of his family under the care of his family and received continuous medication and treatment, there is no risk of recidivism, and there is no need to receive treatment at the medical treatment and custody facility.

2. Determination:

A. Before determining the Defendant’s assertion of unreasonable sentencing as to the part of the Defendant’s case, we examine ex officio as to the obstruction of business around 15:00 on March 3, 2012 against the victim D of the instant facts charged.

(1) The summary of this part of the facts charged reveals that the Defendant lacks the ability to discern things or make decisions due to a mental disorder, and interferes with the victim’s operation of Seodaemun Points by force by force, such as: (a) around 15:00 on March 2012, the victim D in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Nowon-gu’s “E” operated by the victim D in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Nowon-gu; (b) copying documents; and (c) talking with sound.

(2) On March 2012, 2012, when examining whether the Defendant interfered with the Defendant’s business by force at the wording points operated by the victim D around 15:00, the written statement on D with the police alone is insufficient to recognize that the Defendant interfered with the Defendant’s business at the wording points in March 2012, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. Rather, according to the records, the Defendant is located in the Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Nowon-gu from February 22, 2012 to March 12, 2012.