The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.

Sexual assault, 40 hours against the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) The Defendant, at the time of each of the instant crimes, was in a state of lacking decision-making capacity due to the de facto disability and intellectual function disorder. 2) The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court below as to the defendant's mental diagnosis of the medical treatment and custody center in accordance with the entrustment of mental appraisal of the court below, the defendant was seriously ill in arche due to the economic difficulties of the parents in arche, and the defendant took part in the behavior of coming home and theft, etc., and he was showing a deviation from his behavior while continuing bad habits even after the juvenile season, and therefore, "socialized failure" is deemed to have a phenomenon of undermining the recognition function of "border intellectual function". The court below determined that each crime of this case was committed in accordance with the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, and comprehensively considering various circumstances such as the motive, circumstance, means and mode of each crime of this case, the defendant's behavior before and after the crime, and degree of reflection, etc., the defendant can be acknowledged to have suffered a lack of ability to discern things or make decisions due to the disorder of socialized behavior, disorder of boundary function, etc. as mentioned above at the time of each crime of this case.

Therefore, the defendant's argument of mental disability is justified.

B. As long as the defendant and the prosecutor filed an appeal against the accused case regarding the part of the case claiming an attachment order, they are deemed to have filed an appeal regarding the case claiming an attachment order pursuant to Article 9(8) of the Act on the Probation and Electronic Monitoring, etc. of Specific Criminal Offenders, but the defendant has no objection to this part of the judgment below, and the prosecutor shall submit any grounds for appeal as to this part.