Defendant

All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. At the time of committing the instant crime, the Defendant was in a state that he was unable to discern things or make decisions by taking advantage of his personal nature at the time of committing the instant crime.

Therefore, the defendant should be pronounced not guilty in accordance with Article 10(1) of the Criminal Act.

B. Prosecutor 1) Although the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the instant crime, the Defendant did not lack the ability to discern things or make decisions. Therefore, Article 10(2) of the Criminal Act cannot be applied to the Defendant. (2) The sentence imposed by the lower court of unreasonable sentencing (2 million won) is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles with respect to the defendant and prosecutor, it refers to a person who has no ability to discern things or make decisions due to mental or physical disorder as stipulated in Article 10 of the Criminal Act, or a person who lacks such ability, and there is only a simple difference between the two. According to the evidence duly examined by the court below by taking into account the motive and cause of the crime, the background and means of the crime, the behavior of the defendant before and after the crime, the behavior of the defendant to destroy evidence, whether the defendant is memory of the crime and the situation before and after the crime, whether the defendant shows anti-competence, the means and attitude of the defendant to defend himself during the investigation and public trial (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2006Do1854, 206Do8, Feb. 28, 1984; 83Do307, Feb. 28, 1984).

The defendant who is a two-sicker with a small amount of usual liquor shall be drunk to the extent that he/she is unable to fully hold his/her body at the time of the completion of the foregoing ceremony.