1. The part of the judgment below regarding the defendant's case shall be reversed.

2. The defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for four years;

3. A woman seized;

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. At the time of committing the instant crime, the Defendant and the person requesting probation order (hereinafter “Defendant”) had weak ability to discern things or make decisions due to depression and sexual intercourse.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (six years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the claim of mental disability as stipulated in Article 10 of the Criminal Act, it is necessary to say that the mental disorder as stipulated in Article 10 of the Criminal Act includes not only mental disorder such as mental illness or abnormal mental condition, but also mental disorder such as mental disorder lacks or decrease in the ability to discern things or control action accordingly. Thus, even if a person with mental disorder is a person with a normal mental disorder at the time of committing the crime, it cannot be viewed as mental disorder

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 92Do1425, Aug. 18, 1992). According to the records, it is recognized that: (a) the Defendant was diagnosed in 2010 by the depression and shock disorder (goods pornography); (b) was subject to criminal punishment by theft of clothes in neighboring houses and restaurants; (c) as a result of the Defendant’s mental sentiment in the trial, it was proved that the Defendant had symptoms of sexual intercourse (obscenity disorder) using a woman’s clothes in order to obtain sexual satisfaction; and (c) the Defendant appears to have difficulty in internal, passive and personal relations.

However, in light of the following circumstances that can be recognized by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court and the lower court, the background leading up to the instant crime, and the Defendant’s attitude before and after the instant crime, it does not seem that the Defendant had the ability to discern things or make decisions due to depression or sexual intercourse at the time of the instant crime.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's assertion is rejected.

(1)