Defendant

In addition, the appeal filed by the person who requested the medical care and custody is dismissed.

1. The gist of the grounds of appeal is as follows: (a) on June 29, 2016, after the filing period of the appeal, the Defendant asserted the following facts: (b) on the grounds of appeal submitted by the defense counsel on June 29, 2016, the Defendant did not interfere with the funeral service of the K Hospital of the Victim J (Article 2 of the facts charged); (c) did not look at the victim’s head (Article 3 of the facts charged); (d) did not look at the victim’s head; and (e) did not make the victim’s head; and (d) did not read “the death and death” (Article 4 of the facts charged); and (d) did not mislead the victim P as to the facts charged (Article 5).

The appeal may not be a legitimate ground for appeal, which has been filed after the expiration of the period for submission of the written reason for appeal.

Even after ex officio examination, the Defendant: (a) voluntarily led the police to all of the above crimes; and (b) the Defendant acknowledged all the charges except for the allegation that the crime of interference with business was not constituted even in the lower court (94 pages, 99 of the trial record); (b) the victims of the occurrence of the incident, and Qu caused by the occurrence of the crime, by the investigative agency, the Defendant committed the above crime.

Comprehensively taking into account each statement (the 12th, 19th, 25th, 26th, 156, and 167 of the evidence record), this part of the facts charged may be fully admitted.

Therefore, the above assertion by the defendant cannot be accepted as a mother.

The punishment (one year of imprisonment) imposed by the court below on the defendant and the person who requested the care and custody (hereinafter referred to as "defendant") is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant committed the instant crime under the condition that the Defendant had the ability to discern things or make decisions due to a diversity disorder, etc., and committed the instant crime.

The defendant has no history of criminal punishment exceeding a fine.

However, the Defendant committed the crime of property damage, interference with business, assault, special assault, and special intimidation against the victims who did not mislead them.