All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. (1) Although Defendant (1) was in a state of mental disorder or mental disability at the time of each of the instant crimes with a disability of class 2 with intellectual disability, each of the lower courts found Defendant guilty of all of the instant facts charged or did not reduce the degree of mental disability, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment

(2) Each sentence (the first instance court: the imprisonment of 10 months and the second instance court: the imprisonment of 8 months) imposed by the court below on the defendant is too unreasonable.

(b) The sentence sentenced to the defendant by the first instance court of the prosecutor (ten months of imprisonment) is too unhued and unreasonable;

2. Determination

A. Prior to the judgment on the grounds of ex officio appeal, the judgment of the court below was examined ex officio, and this court decided to hold a concurrent trial by filing an appeal with the defendant and the prosecutor against the judgment of the court below. Each of the offenses against each defendant is concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and the judgment of the court below should be sentenced to one punishment pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. Thus, the judgment of the court

However, even if the court below's above reasons for ex officio destruction exist, the defendant's assertion of legal principles is still subject to the judgment of this court.

B. According to the record on the assertion of misapprehension of the legal principles as to mental or physical disability, the defendant was registered as a disabled person of Grade II with intellectual disability on December 28, 2007, and the defendant was diagnosed as a self-pulmonary disability, intellectual disability, shock disorder, and shock disorder in Twon located in the Gu, and was subject to drug treatment from September 3, 2007 to the end of January 2016, but is recognized as follows by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below. In other words, the following are acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below.