(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.10.14. 선고 2016고합673 판결

The defendant and the respondent for military service and the respondent for attachment order (hereinafter referred to as the "defendants") have started to suffer from mental anxietys from the middle and high school, and around March 2003, the hospital was treated as a dynasium hospital, such as "after entering the Cynasium," "after entering the Kynasium, she will come to fest in the subway, or she will come to her own fling and her soil." On June 2004, the hospital was diagnosed as a public duty personnel after being judged as a dynasium disorder in the military affairs examination. After being hospitalized with the symptoms of mental illness and outpatient treatment, the hospital was hospitalized in the Dynasium on August 209, and was diagnosed as a dynasium (psynasium).

Since then, the defendant was pointed out or interfered with the surrounding people, such as his family, due to sanitary management and clean problems that are not well bath, spathy, and spathy, and if the defendant was hospitalized in a mental hospital and was discharged from the hospital on a multiple occasions, the symptoms are repeated or aggravated by suspending the use of drugs and by using violence to his family.

In addition, around March 2015, the Defendant re-entered to the C New Teaching Institutes and had a mecon with him due to sanitary management and clean problems, and around August 2015, the Defendant resided in the second floor of the Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government E-house in the 2nd floor in Gangseo-gu, Seoul, and was reported on August 2015, which led to a noise problem between the fourth floor and the fourth floor, and even being hospitalized in the F Hospital in Sejong City and being treated for treatment, the Defendant still shows symptoms that the net accident continues. On the road, there was a loss caused by the damage network, such as the Defendant’s re-admission to the C New Teaching Institutes and caused women to see and bullying themselves.

【Resolution of Criminal Conduct】

The Defendant discharged from the F Hospital on January 2016, and suspended the use of drugs. On March 2016, the Defendant was accommodated in the stairs or toilets in the building in Gangnam-gu Seoul, Gangnam-gu, Seoul, while staying in the house and performing job-seeking activities. On May 5 and June 2016, the Defendant was working for the ○○○○ Port located in Seocho-gu Seoul, and was working in and from the toilet of the △△△△ branch office located near H.

Then, while working in the above ○○ Pool, the Defendant believed that female customers were able to see her hurdly hurdly hull. Around May 15, 2016, young women who smoked in the above ○ Pool near the ○ Pool were working in a lux, and she was able to kill women who are using the above ○ ○ ○○ Pool in a way to resolve stress and fluor caused by women suffering from damage to themselves and set up against them. As such, the Defendant was able to kill women who are using the above ○ ○ Pool at the male public toilet of △△ Building where the said ○ Pool was located.

On May 16, 2016, at around 17:40, the Defendant set up the above ○○○○○○○○, and carried food blades (referring to 32.5cm in total length, 20cm in blades) attached to the kitchen, which were displayed on the kitchen, in front of the Cheongbane, and returned to the above △△ building planned to be the place of crime at around 23:44 on the same day, after having come to the male toilet of the building in Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan City by using subway, etc., for approximately two hours.

【Execution of Criminal Conduct】

From around that time, the Defendant 50 minutes of approximately 50 minutes of tobacco smoking at the entrance of the entrance of the male and female public toilet in the stairs between the first floor and the second floor of the building in △△△ building, which was following the day of May 17, 2016, the Defendant ended with committing the crime on May 17, 2016, and 0:30 minutes following the day she entered the above toilet, and she gets a woman who uses the toilet alone, and gets into the toilet alone for about 30 minutes.

At around 01:07 on the same day, the Defendant: (a) took the victim’s O (22 years of age) who was sitting in the front side of the said toilet with one-way walked, she was able to listen to the sound of drinking with one-way drinking together; (b) opened a door door to the front side of the said woman’s gate and waiting for the front side; (c) took the victim’s cell phone back to the front side; and (d) took the part of the victim’s left breast part of the said toilet, knife the knife, knife the part of the victim’s chest, knife the knife, knife the knife, knife the knife, knife the victim’s breast, knife the knife, knife the victim’s part, and knife the chest, and knife the chest, etc.;

(Grounds for Filing Requests for Medical Treatment and Custody)

Around August 2009, the Defendant received a diagnosis of early illness at least six times in total, but continued to receive hospitalized treatment, such as damage network, related circumstances, reality judgment disorder, shock disorder, shocking ability, lack of meals, etc. In addition, the Defendant killed a victim with mental and physical disorder caused by mental illness, such as damage network, etc. at the time of committing the instant crime. In light of the above Defendant’s mental and physical disorder and mental state, the motive and background of the instant crime, reflectivity after committing the instant crime, and the circumstances before the death, etc., the Defendant is likely to repeat the crime, and there is a need for mental and hospitalized treatment through medical treatment and custody, such as illegal pharmacologic treatment period, mental therapy, rehabilitation procedure, etc. in the future.

The cause of the request for attachment order)

In light of the Defendant’s mental capacity and mental disorder status, the motive and background of the instant crime, the reflectivity after the instant crime, and the circumstances before the opening, etc., it is recognized that the Defendant is likely to recommit the murder crime, and thus, an order to attach a location tracking device is necessary.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of the witness J, K, L, M, N,O, and P;

1. Each protocol concerning the examination of the accused by the prosecution;

1. A protocol of each prosecutorial statement concerning Q, R,O, J, and K;

1. Each protocol concerning the examination of the suspect against the defendant;

1. Statement of each police statement on S, T, Q and R;

1. J. Each statement of L;

1. A written result of autopsy and a written result of autopsy and appraisal;

1. Records of seizure and the list of seizure;

1. On-site identification reports, gathering of a blood trace in front of the exit of H 11, photo of the scene of the crime, cutting of CCTV images, photograph of the victim, investigation report (in relation to the victim's damaged floor and his/her descendants), each request for appraisal, response to verification of identity of the suspect, identification of identity of the murder case fingerprints, investigation report (a suspect escape and time analysis), investigation report (in the case of the suspect A), copy of the data on singCC TV, voice recording prior to and after the suspect's crime (related to the suspect A), recording report (in the case of the suspect AI), copy of the data on the investigation (in the case of the suspect AI), moving path before and after the suspect's crime, recording path prior to and after the crime, recording of CCTV video images after the CCTV, the actual situation investigation report, each on-site verification report, legal chemical appraisal report, output of text messages, video image CDs prior to and after the crime, mobile analysis data;

1. The details of health insurance benefits, medical opinion, written confirmation of admission and discharge (four copies), certificate of certificate of medical examination and discharge, certificate of designation of a workplace of public duty personnel, order to designate a workplace of public duty personnel, service record of a person dismissed from the service of public duty personnel, medical records, school life records, 112 report records, status of the receipt and treatment of accidents, mental appraisal report, and response

1. The need for the treatment of the case, the risk of recidivism, and the risk of recidivism: Each of the following facts and circumstances recognized by each description of the defendant's mental appraisal report and a response prior to the request, in particular, the defendant suffered from fluoral disease showing symptoms, such as the damage network, exchange hearing, reality judgment disorder, etc., the possibility of recidivism in the event that the defendant requires future mental diagnosis and treatment for the treatment of mental disorder, and does not receive treatment, the risk of recidivism is 12 points in total as a result of the evaluation of the adult recidivism risk assessment tool for the defendant, and the crime in this case is found to have resulted in death in a knife with any victim who does not have any knife, and thus, the defendant's life and attitude at the time of the defendant's death, the environment, personality and conduct of the defendant, the circumstances and circumstances of the crime after the suspension of medical treatment and custody, and it is judged that there is a danger of recidivism in the case of the defendant again even after the termination of medical treatment and custody.

Judgment on the Liability Capacity

Although the Defendant consistently asserts that the investigative agency did not commit the instant crime in a state of mental disorder caused by a mental disorder, the Defendant has consistently asserted that the Defendant did not have committed the instant crime in a state of mental disorder by this court. However, since the defense counsel presented his/her opinion on the part of the Defendant, and considerable number of materials, such as a medical certificate consistent with the assertion, were submitted, this court ex officio determines whether the Defendant committed the instant crime in a state of mental disorder, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 200

In light of the evidence duly adopted and examined by this Court, according to the following facts and circumstances, the Defendant seems to have weak ability to distinguish objects and make decisions at the time of committing the instant crime.

1. The mental capacity of the accused, the doctor who treated the accused, and the opinion of an expert witness;

A. At around 199, the Defendant, at the time of the second year in high school, went through a diagnosis of a mental disorder by a psychiatrist and received treatment such as outpatients, counseling, etc. (at the time when the Defendant was rejected), and around 2005, the Defendant was diagnosed as an old age at U.S. Hospital around 2005.

B. On Aug. 12, 2009, the Defendant was hospitalized at D Hospital on Aug. 12, 2009, and received a diagnosis of bitrified-type early September 11, 2009. At the time of hospitalization, the Defendant expressed that “at the time of hospitalization, the Defendant saw that he was frighting to people for two to three years, while he was suffering from suffering from being frighting. It is difficult to say that he was able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to.”

C. On December 16, 2010, the Defendant was hospitalized in the V Hospital as the case of shouldering the common colon glass of the Lone’s residence, and received hospitalized treatment between June 15, 201. According to the medical record at the time of hospitalization, the Defendant was able to take a bath to the medical team, and the Defendant appeared in the attitude of bad sanitary care during the duration of hospitalization, and was aggressive tendency toward the final medical team.

D. The Defendant was hospitalized in F Hospital on February 24, 2012, and the Defendant had been hospitalized and discharged repeatedly 2). Around July 2015, the Defendant resided in the second floor with the sound of a female scarcity, and the third and fourth level of residents several times. Around August 2015, the Defendant was hospitalized in the police for about five months from August 7, 2015 to January 4, 2016. According to the medical record at the time of hospitalization (Evidence No. 295 of the Evidence Record No. 1: 295 of the Evidence Record), the Defendant had symptoms, such as face-to-face accident and hearing of pacence, and continuous sanitary depression and current circumstances while hospitalized, and lack of symptoms to scarcity himself/herself due to lack of symptoms, and symptoms to scarcitys.

E. After discharge on January 1, 2016, the Defendant was not able to take medicine after discharge, and around March 2016, the Defendant was not able to take care of the symptoms of the Defendant (Evidence Record 1: 227 pages, 246 pages, 2: 681 pages, 681);

F. From October 2015 to January 2016, M who treated the Defendant as the Defendant’s person in charge from around October 2015 to around January 2016 testified to the effect that “in this court, the symptoms of acute symptoms have been considerably mitigated through medication, and had a little damage accident even though they did not indicate the symptoms of considerable damage network at the time of October 2015, and that if the Defendant did not take medicine after January 4, 2016, it is likely that the symptoms were caused by the original symptoms as at the time of the instant case.”

After the crime of this case, P made a mental appraisal on the defendant's present mental state of the defendant shows mental symptoms such as damage net, related circumstances, unstable appraisal, unstable appraisal, reality judgment disorder, shock control disorder, lack of pathology, etc., and at the time of the crime of this case, the defendant testified to the effect that "the defendant is presumed to have been similar to the present mental state at the time of the crime of this case," and that "the defendant is presumed to have been aware that he had been able to think that he had suffered damage and had acted on the basis of such a circumstance, considering the symptoms of the damage net and related network at the time of the crime of this case."

2. The behavior and character of the defendant;

A. From May 8, 2016, the J, who had worked with the Defendant from around May 8, 2016 before the instant crime, testified to the effect that “I see that “I am well-known and well-known when I am out” in this court. However, I see that I see that “I am friendly when I am, without doing any action, once I am in a case where I am, I am in a lot of other thoughts.” The written statement submitted by the investigative agency includes that “I am in a lot of cases where I am while I am in a work, and I am out or act, but I am in a way of mental apprehension.”

B. The Defendant, upon the flow of a knife, did so, she would have been cut, and she would have been cut off from the knife. The knife. she was cut, and the knife she would cut off the knife." (Evidence No. 679). The Defendant’s mother pointed out the Defendant’s sanitary condition at the time of working in the restaurant, and, as her mother pointed out, she would have “I would like to see why she was the president? I would like to see the Defendant’s flife the knife with the inside? I want to do so with the knife?” (Evidence No. 1, No. 230, No. 675 page 675).

C. On January 2016, the Defendant was removed from a private teaching institute that was accompanying the Defendant, and the period of compulsory service was delayed for about four months due to frequent gymnasium and absence, and the Defendant began to work at a restaurant where the Defendant’s mother works, but he was snick in his body and snick in his body, and the Defendant did not have a proper social life until two weeks (Evidence Nos. 681 of evidence record).

D. The Defendant also recognized that there was an assault committed against the mother after discharge at a V hospital (Evidence No. 2, 1028 pages), and that each medical record of a V hospital, V hospital, and F hospital contains that the Defendant had no impulse and violent behavior prior to hospitalization, and that the mother among his family members had exercised violence (Evidence Nos. 1, 295, 4, 22 pages). It conforms to the above statement.

E. The Defendant, even in this Court, committed an act inappropriate to understand the situation, such as changing the place of a fluence, etc.

3. The plannedness of the instant crime

A. After the Defendant decided to commit the instant crime, the Defendant prepared to set the place of the instant crime, the date and time of the instant crime in advance, the preparation for the commission of the crime, the fact that the instant crime was planned to be committed in the toilet around 00:35 on May 17, 2016 (However, according to the images of sing CCTV data, the Defendant arrived at the building of △△△ Building around 11:40 on May 16, 2016 and got tobacco from around 00:30 on the following day, but did not have any particular interest in the toilet while avoiding tobacco until 00:30 on the following day, so it cannot be denied that the instant crime was planned to be committed in view of the fact that the instant crime was committed.

B. However, the crime of this case is not deemed to have been committed under an intelligent and fatal plan to the extent that it is difficult to see that the crime of this case was committed in a state of mental disorder (the crime of this case was committed by the male who was in the toilet after the victim). In light of the witness P's testimony and previous precedents, it cannot be readily concluded that a certain level of planned behavior is impossible on the ground that the crime of this case was committed by a man who was in the toilet after the victim). In light of the fact that the defendant did not engage in any act such as hiding the crime of this case after the crime of this case, or concealing the knife knife for committing the crime, and that he did not attempt to see his own form in the Gangnam of the CCTV, and that the plan of the crime of this case was committed in the state of mental and physical disorder by the influence of the knife knife knife after the crime of this case, it is difficult to deny the fact that the crime of this case was committed in the state of mental disorder.

Application of Statutes

1. Article applicable to criminal facts;

Article 250(1) of the Criminal Act (Appointment of Imprisonment for Arms)

1. Statutory mitigation;

Articles 10(2) and 55(1)2 of the Criminal Act (non-incompetent of mental illness)

1. Medical treatment and custody;

Articles 2(1)1 and 12 of the Medical Treatment and Custody Act

1. Grounds for sentencing under Articles 5 (3), 2 (3), 3-2 (a), 9 (1) 1, and 9-2 (1) 1, 2-2, 3, and 5 of the Act on Probation and Electronic Monitoring, etc. of Specific Criminal Offenders subject to the issuance of an order to attach electronic tracking devices and matters to be observed;

1. Scope of applicable sentences under law: Imprisonment of 10 years to 50 years; and

2. Scope of recommended sentences according to the sentencing criteria;

[Determination of Punishment] Type 3 (Murder of Non-Influorous homicide)

[Special Aggravation] Aggravations: planned murder and cruel methods

Measures to mitigate: A mentally ill-incompetent (a case in which the defendant himself/herself does not cause a state of mental disability)

[Scope of Recommendation] Aggravation (at least 18 years of imprisonment)

3. Determination of sentence: Imprisonment with prison labor for 30 years; life of a human being is the most important legal interest to protect his/her life, and the right to life is the crime of homicideing the life of the most valuable value, which makes it impossible for him/her to recover damage by any means. Furthermore, the crime of this case was committed at the Gangnam-gu Seoul, Gangnam, which can be called Korean representative prosperity, with the victim brutly killed the victim without any awareness. It appears that there is no reason to take into account the motive of the act of cutting the victim's life from the victim's body, and there is no obvious difference between the victim's death and the victim's usual murder based on a certain human relationship between the offender and the victim. It is difficult for the victim to take into account the motive of the act of cutting the victim's body and the victim's body from the victim's body at the time of the murder without prison, and there is no concern for the victim to take out the victim's body as a whole. It is hard to see that the victim's body might be out of social violence.

In the course of the instant crime, the victims under the age 22, who had not been able to work in the university after faithfully and faithfully, her father, love son, female son, and graduated from the university, lost their lives without having been able to express her intention at all in an unforeseeable manner. The bereaved family members have been able to lead a daily life due to her shock, and have been unable to live without any endless pain through their lives. On the contrary, the Defendant does not seem to have any attitude against the instant crime, such as taking the victim’s name tag or seeking a staff letter with a serious mind on the part of her bereaved family members, and rather, in this court, the Defendant appears to have continuously and well considered the same way as “if it does not occur, she might have been able to get off her bereaved family members, and even if she had come to work naturally, she would be able to be punished by the victim’s strong attitude against the Defendant.”

However, the imposition of punishment, which is a state action, in a literacy country, must be exercised within the scope that guarantees the dignity and value of human beings declared by the Constitution. As a practical method, our criminal justice law, in principle, punishs only acts under the state of responsibility and declares the so-called ‘liability Principle' that the sentencing according to the degree of responsibility. As seen earlier, with respect to the defendant who shows incomplete responsibility, the sentence against the defendant for the realization of the principle of responsibility, which is the foundation of criminal justice, should not be considered in determining the sentence against the defendant for the sake of the realization of the principle of responsibility, which is the foundation of criminal justice. In addition, it is recognized that the defendant confessions the crime of this case itself and has no criminal record except for the punishment once by a fine.

P, a mental appraisal, is not defluorating women, but has a tendency to defluence men in this court. From the time of birth, the father was hick, the father was unable to express his opinion in front of his father at all times, and was included in the Jeju Special Self-Governing Council at all times. He testified to the purport that “I have been unable to accept the birth itself as the father itself. The same is the same as the father.” In fact, the Defendant, as a result of the head fluencation, has been able to support the father’s descendants, etc., who was married to the father, was fluently hospitalized by his father, and had been living together with his father, and seems to have been almost fluent with his father. Ultimately, the Defendant appears to have committed a relative crime against women, who are the weak, due to the character of fluening women, and the awareness of damage affected by the deceased.

Ultimately, in addition to the above circumstances, the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, circumstances after crimes, criminal records, and the scope of recommended sentence according to the sentencing guidelines set by the Sentencing Committee of the Supreme Court set forth in the records and arguments, shall be determined as ordered by comprehensively taking account of the various circumstances revealed in the records and arguments. In addition, it is pointed out that the Defendant’s parole at risk of recidivism should be prudented.

Judges

Chief Judge Cho Nam-nam

Judges authorized-type Judge

Judges Yoon Dong-dong

Note tin

1) To the extent that there is no disadvantage to the Defendant’s defense, the facts charged are revised as above.

2) After February 24, 2012, the Defendant hospitalized a total of four times, 13 months (from February 24, 2012 to 3.31; from August 27, 2012 to February 27, 2013; from March 4, 2013 to March 12, 2013; from August 7 to January 4, 2016).