The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In light of the contents of a written mental appraisal of the Defendant, misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles, and the Defendant received only a short-term treatment for the past mental illness, and the place of the instant crime was a hospital located far away from his residence, the place of the larceny crime in the past, the office of the hospital, the clinic, etc. in preparation for the crime, and the Defendant’s past career and family relation, etc., it is difficult to deem that the Defendant was in a state of mental and physical disability caused by mental disorder as decided by the lower court at the time of the instant crime, even though it was difficult to deem that the Defendant was in a state of mental and physical disability caused by mental disorder as determined by the lower court at the time of the instant crime, by misunderstanding of facts or by

B. The sentence of one year and six months, which the court below sentenced to the defendant, is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Determination:

가. 사실오인 내지 법리오해 주장에 대한 판단 ㈎ 피고인의 심신미약에 관한 원심의 판단 원심은 적법한 선정절차를 거쳐 선정된 7명의 배심원들로 배심원단을 구성하여 국민참여재판으로 진행되었는데, 원심 배심원단은 배심원 전원의 만장일치로 이 사건 공소사실을 유죄로 인정하면서 피고인이 이 사건 범행 당시 심신미약의 상태에 있었다고 평결하였고, 원심 법원은 심신미약에 관하여 위와 같은 배심원단의 평결 결과를 존중하여 기록에 의하여 인정되는 다음과 같은 사정들, ① 공주치료감호소 소속 의사인 원심 증인 J는 원심 법정에서 피고인에 대하여 현재 및 범행 당시 심신장애가 없는 것으로 보인다고 감정하였으나, 감정대상자의 심신장애 유무가 명확하지 않고 한계선상에 있는 경우는 감정대상자가 일반적인 교정시실에서...