The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two years and six months.

A seized grandchild (No. 1).

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence imposed by the court below (three years of imprisonment) against the defendant and the requester for medical treatment and custody (hereinafter "defendant") is too unreasonable.

(3) The defendant's defense counsel stated a mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles on the grounds of appeal other than unfair sentencing, but the defendant and the public defender clearly stated that they appealed on the grounds of unfair sentencing on the first trial date.

The sentence imposed by the court below against the defendant is too uneasible and unfair.

2. We examine ex officio the defendant and prosecutor's grounds for appeal as to mental disability judgment prior to the judgment.

Determination as to whether or not a mental or physical disorder prescribed in Article 10(1) and (2) of the Criminal Act exists and degree of the mental or physical disorder is not necessarily bound by the opinion of a specialized appraiser as a legal judgment, but can be independently determined by the court by taking into account all the circumstances such as the type and degree of the mental or physical disorder, motive and background of the crime, means and mode of the crime, the behavior of the defendant before and after the crime, and degree of reflectivity (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 94Do581, May 13, 1994). If the defendant is registered as disabled and the criminal investigation agency has continuously asserted his or her mental or physical disorder from the criminal investigation agency, even if the defendant did not express his or her mental or physical disorder in the statement of grounds for appeal, the mental or physical disorder

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Do870, Apr. 9, 2009). In the instant case, the Defendant voluntarily stated that he was a mentally ill person from the time when he was arrested due to the instant crime, and even when he was investigated by an investigative agency, the Defendant is married to the same person.