The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two years and six months.

A seized kitchen (No. 1) shall be confiscated.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. A. The Defendant, at the time of each of the instant crimes, was in a state of mental disability due to stimulative shock disorder, stimulative shock disorder, etc., and thus, the punishment should be mitigated.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (three years of imprisonment, confiscation) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Paragraph (2) of the holding is judged as an attempted crime (ex officio judgment) and where an act of commission of a crime is suspended by his own free will before the crime is completed, it shall be deemed as an attempted crime if the suspension is not due to circumstances that obstruct the completion of the crime under ordinary social norms. However, if the crime is discontinued due to the occurrence or failure of the crime, it shall be deemed as an obstacle to the completion of the crime under ordinary social norms. Thus, it shall not be deemed as an attempted crime by a person.

(See Supreme Court Decision 201Do10539 Decided November 10, 201). Comprehensively taking account of the aforementioned legal principles and the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, the Defendant may recognize the fact that the Defendant suspended the remaining crimes that he thought that it would not be successful in committing the crime due to an increase in the value of the victim at the time of committing the crime. Such circumstance constitutes a situation that may interfere with the completion of the crime under social norms. Thus, the Defendant’s crime constitutes attempted disability.

B. According to the judgment of the court below and the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below as to the claim of mental illness, the defendant can be found to have received mental treatment from the past due to mental illness, such as stimulative depression, stimulative shock disorder, etc. However, in light of the circumstances before and after each of the crimes in this case, the circumstances leading to the crime, the circumstances leading to the defendant's act at the time, the statement made by the defendant at the investigative agency and the court, etc., the defendant is the above mental illness at the