All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a year and a fine of KRW 100,000.

The defendant above.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. At the time of each of the instant crimes, the Defendant had no or weak ability to discern things or make decisions due to stimulative disorder.

B. The sentence sentenced by the court below to the defendant (the first instance court: imprisonment of 8 months, the second instance court: imprisonment of 8 months, the fine of 10,00 won) is too unreasonable.

2. The court decided to consolidate the appeal case of the first instance judgment against the defendant and the second instance judgment. On the other hand, the prosecutor applied for changes in the bill of amendment to the indictment to "Article 3 (1) and Article 2 (1) 1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act," and Article 366 of the Criminal Act, which applied to the above facts charged, to "Article 369 and Article 366 of the Criminal Act," which read "Article 369 of the Criminal Act and Article 366 of the Criminal Act," which read the name of the crime as to the part of the facts charged in the first instance judgment of this case as "the violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (damage to property, such as group, deadly weapons, etc.)" as "damage to special property."

The judgment of the court below is no longer maintained due to the above reasons for reversal, but the defendant's mental and physical argument is still subject to the judgment of the court, and this is examined.

3. According to the records on the assertion of mental and physical disorder, the Defendant appears to have been receiving medical care for a considerable period of time due to stimulative disorder, and was receiving medical care due to mental and physical disorder in 193 and 1998. However, in full view of the following circumstances after the Defendant committed the instant crime, including the background leading up to the instant crime, the method and method of committing the crime, the Defendant’s refusal to peruse and seal the suspect interrogation protocol, etc. (No. 24 right 23 pages 1 of the investigation record), the Defendant had no or weak ability to discern things or make decisions at the time of the instant crime.

Therefore, the defendant's mental and physical disability argument is without merit.

4. Conclusion.