The case holding that the case should have judged whether the person is a mentally handicapped person;

If the defendant stated in the court that the victim did not appear to be the victim at the time of the crime and that the victim died of Hanmari, there is a reason to suspect whether the defendant was not a physically handicapped person at the time of the crime. However, it is erroneous in failing to examine and determine whether the defendant had the ability to discern things or make decisions at the time of the crime.

Article 10 of the Criminal Act

Supreme Court Decision 4288Ma45 delivered on July 8, 1955 (Dacard 4594, Article 10(3)1224 of the Criminal Act) (No. 518 delivered on November 29, 1955, Supreme Court Decision 5118 delivered on November 29, 195, and Article 10(4)124 of the Criminal Act (No. 1224 delivered on November 29, 195)

Defendant

Defendant and Prosecutor

Seoul District Court Incheon Branch Court Decision 76 Height99)

Supreme Court Decision 76Do4390 Delivered on February 22, 1977

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant is innocent.

The gist of the grounds for appeal by the defendant was in a state where the defendant was unable to discern things or make decisions due to mental disorder at the time of the crime in this case, but the court below found the defendant guilty. The judgment of the court below was erroneous in the misapprehension of facts or erroneous judgment as to mental and physical disorder, which affected the conclusion of the judgment. The gist of the grounds for appeal by the defense counsel is that the sentence imposed by the court below is too unreasonable. The summary of the grounds for appeal by the prosecutor is that the above sentence is too unreasonable.

Therefore, according to the first trial record of the court below, the defendant's appeal is examined as to the grounds for appeal by the defendant. The court below stated that the defendant thought that the victim would die without being seen as the person at the time of the crime. Thus, the court below should have judged on this point by examining whether the defendant had the ability to discern things or make decisions at the time of the crime. Thus, the court below erred in the misapprehension of law as to the determination of mental and physical disorder, and there is no need to determine the remaining grounds for appeal.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below shall be reversed in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the judgment shall be rendered again after pleading.

The summary of the facts charged is that the defendant, at around 10:00 on December 21, 1975, had no capacity to conduct the crime on the part of the defendant, Nam-gu, Incheon, sublime (hereinafter omitted), 3,4 times the whole body of the victim, who was locked at his house in the front line, and she salute his body with a defect of 3,4 times, and killed salute with salute with salute at hand, and he was saluteed with salute and salute with salute and salute at the time of division. According to the above facts charged, the defendant was found to have no capacity to conduct the crime on the part of the non-indicted 2, 100 meters from his house to 1,000 meters from 1,000 from 1,000 from 22,000 from 3,000 from 1,000 from 1,00.

Thus, this case constitutes an act of a person who has no ability to discern things or make decisions due to mental disorder, and thus does not constitute a crime, and thus, a verdict of innocence is rendered to the defendant under the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.

Judge Advice (Presiding Judge)