Defendant

In addition, the appeal by the candidate for medical treatment and custody is dismissed.

1. The court below rendered a judgment of conviction on the part of the defendant's case against the defendant and the requester for medical treatment and custody (hereinafter "defendant"), the part of the medical treatment and custody claim, and the prosecutor's request on the part of the request for attachment order.

However, only the defendant filed an appeal against the defendant's case and the medical treatment and custody application case, and the part of the request for attachment order does not have any interest in appeal, and despite the provisions of Article 9 (8) of the Act on Probation and Electronic Monitoring, etc. of Specific Criminal Offenders, the part of the request for attachment

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. 1) In the instant case, the Defendant was in a state of mental disorder beyond the state of mental disorder at the time of the instant case. 2) Since a person who was aware of a mistake of facts and a misapprehension of legal principles as a subject of a crime was not his father and mother, but a fake father and a fake mother, the Defendant’s act constitutes a general murder and injury rather than a crime of continuing murder and injury.

3) The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one year of imprisonment is too unlimited and unfair).

B. Medical treatment and custody need not be deemed necessary since the defendant related to medical treatment and custody has a past history of medical treatment and has received thorough medical treatment of the defendant's family members, and the purpose of preventing recidivism can be achieved through medical treatment at a private hospital.

3. Determination of the accused case

A. The Defendant alleged that the Defendant was similar to this part of the grounds for appeal in the lower court’s determination on the assertion of defectiveness.

As to this, the lower court acknowledged the following circumstances based on the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, i.e., the victim’s sudden eye.