The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. From January 5, 2019 to July 1, 2019, the Defendant: (a) was diagnosed as “a stimulative disorder, well-known mental disorder without any symptoms; (b) was hospitalized in a hospital and received treatment; and (c) was affected by the influence of mental illness, such as being hospitalized in a hospital due to “a symptoms such as the lack of repayment of illness, sensivity, decline in judgment, and difficulty in health management, etc.”; and (d) was committed an attempted special robbery, etc. in the judgment of the court below in the state of mental and physical disorder (hereinafter “instant crime”).

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which did not recognize mental illness of the defendant is illegal.

B. The lower court’s sentencing is too excessive and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Determination as to mental disorder under Article 10 of the Criminal Act requires mental disorder other than mental disorder such as mental illness or abnormal mental condition, which lacks or reduces the ability to discern things or control action accordingly. Thus, even if a person with mental disorder is a person with normal mental disorder at the time of committing the crime, it cannot be deemed mental disorder if he/she had normal ability to discern things and control action (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Do12689, Jan. 24, 2013). 2) Based on the above legal principles, the mental disorder cannot be deemed as a mental disorder (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Do12689, Jan. 24, 2013). Based on the above legal principles, the following facts: (a) the Defendant’s behavior before and after the crime of this case; (b) the motive for the crime of this case; and (c) the Defendant’s statement made to the investigation agency about the situation before and after the trial.