The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the above punishment shall be imposed for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. At the time of committing the instant crime, the Defendant was in a state of mental suffering from depression and shock disorder.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one hundred months of imprisonment, confiscation) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the result of the sentencing investigation in the judgment of the court on the claim of mental retardation, the defendant's claim of mental retardation is rejected, since it is recognized that the defendant suffers from depression and shock disorder, etc., but it does not seem that the defendant lacks the ability to discern things or make decisions. Thus, the defendant's claim of mental retardation is rejected.

B. Although the nature of the crime is not somewhat weak when considering the circumstances leading up to the judgment on the assertion of unfair sentencing and the deadly weapons purchased by the defendant, the sentencing examination results of the court below, which are acknowledged as a comprehensive consideration of the following circumstances, i.e., the defendant was committed at the time of the crime in the trial, and the defendant did not have the same criminal record, and there seems to have been no criminal record at the time of the crime in the trial, and the defendant's somewhat unstable mental state, such as depression, appears to have partly caused the crime in this case, and the victim's initiatives the defendant, and there seems to have been considerable room for considering the motive and background of the crime in this case, as well as the fact that the defendant did not have a specific and solid intention to kill the victim. Above all, considering the fact that the defendant agreed smoothly with the victim in the trial, and the fact that the defendant agreed smoothly with the victim in this case, and other various circumstances that are the conditions of sentencing

3. As such, the defendant's argument of mental disability is without merit, but the argument of unfair sentencing is with merit, so the judgment of the court below is reversed under Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the argument is

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts charged and the evidence admitted by the court is the question of the judgment below.