All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for nine months.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant was in a state of mental disability with weak capacity to distinguish things or make decisions at the time of committing the instant crime.

B. Each sentence of the lower court (the first and second lower judgment): Imprisonment with prison labor for August and the second lower judgment: imprisonment with prison labor for February and confiscation) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Before determining the grounds for appeal by the Defendant’s ex officio, this Court tried to hold the two cases of appeal by the Defendant together with the two cases of appeal by the Defendant. Each of the two cases of concurrent trial by the court below is a concurrent crime under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and thus, a single sentence shall be imposed within the scope of the term of punishment imposed for concurrent crimes pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. In this respect, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained.

Despite the above reasons for ex officio reversal, the defendant's assertion of mental disability is still subject to the judgment of this court, and this is examined.

B. According to the records on the determination of mental and physical disability, in light of the defendant's method of crime, the situation before and after the crime, etc., it is not deemed that the defendant did not have the ability to discern things or make decisions at the time of the crime in this case.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's argument is without merit.

3. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, on the ground that the above reasons for reversal of authority exist, and it is again decided as follows.

[Discied Judgment] The summary of facts constituting an offense and evidence recognized by the court is identical to the description of each corresponding column of the judgment below. Thus, it is acceptable to accept it as it is in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

The laws and regulations;