The judgment below

The part of the crime No. 1-A and B of the 2018 Highest 1200 case is reversed.

Defendant 2018 High Order 1200.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. At the time of each of the instant crimes, the Defendant with mental disorder had a mental disorder called “military register dynasium” and had weak ability to discern things or make decisions.

B. Each sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (an offense No. 1-A, B, as indicated in the Decision 2018 high group 1200 cases: imprisonment with prison labor for two months, 2018 high group 1-C, 200 high group 1-3, 2-2, and 591 high group 591 as indicated in the Decision) is too unreasonable.

2. The phenomenon that leads to the crime committed as a result of his/her failure to suppress his/her impulse of judgment on the assertion of mental and physical weakness can be found to be even to the normal person. Barring any special circumstance, it cannot be said that a person with the above character defect requires an act that cannot be expected to restrain his/her impulse and to demand compliance with the law, and thus, it is reasonable to deem that, in principle, the defect, such as shock disorder, does not constitute a mental and physical disorder, which is the reason for the reduction or exemption of punishment.

However, in a case where a mental disease within the original meaning that impedes the ability to discern things more than that, or where even though the cause of a disorder of character such as shock disorder is very serious and it can be evaluated that the cause of the disorder is equal to that of the person with mental disorder within the original meaning, the crime of larceny resulting therefrom shall be deemed to constitute a crime of larceny (see Supreme Court Decision 2002Do1541, May 24, 2002, etc.). According to the records, the fact that the defendant is a person with a disability of Grade III intellectual disability of the defendant and the defendant was diagnosed with a certificate of military register quality dystrophy (a theft wall) on May 24, 2018 can be recognized.

However, the circumstances of each of the crimes of this case, the method and attitude of the crimes, the circumstances after the crimes, in particular, the defendant has no career of receiving diagnosis of mental illness prior to the crimes of this case, and ② the defendant has remaining things at the investigative agency.