The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

A seized camping net.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence of the lower judgment on unreasonable sentencing (ten months of imprisonment, confiscation) is too unreasonable.

B. The Defendant with mental disorder did not control himself due to depression and committed the instant crime.

2. Determination

A. The court below, ex officio, decided and notified that the defendant made a confession of the facts charged in this case and completed the examination of evidence in accordance with the method prescribed in Article 297-2 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and found the defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case by considering the evidence as admissible pursuant to Article 318-3 of the same Act. According to the records, the defendant stated in the court below that he was guilty of the facts charged in this case because he was unable to control himself due to depression on each trial date of the first, third, and fourth, although he stated in the court below that he was guilty of the facts charged in this case, he made a statement to the effect that he was guilty of the crime in this case because he was unable to control himself due to depression in the first, fourth, and that he did not cause the crime in this case. In full view of the purport of the defendant's statement, the court below's order that the defendant made a decision to judge as a simplified trial procedure pursuant to Article 286-3 of the same Act on the ground that it cannot be deemed that the defendant was a confession in full court.

However, although the judgment of the court below has the above reasons for ex officio destruction, the above argument by the defendant is still subject to the judgment of the court.

B. Although the defendant was found to have received medical treatment due to depression, the defendant did not have the ability or decision-making ability to discern things due to depression at the time of each crime of this case.

There is no evidence to prove that the defendant was in a state of mental disorder due to depression, and thus the defendant was in a state of mental disorder.