The sentence of sentence against the defendant shall be suspended.

Punishment of the crime

On September 1, 2019, when the defendant lacks the ability to discern things or make decisions due to stimulative disorder, current symptoms of mental disorder, etc., the defendant entered the above elementary school playground beyond her gate without any justifiable reason against the victim D's intention who is the head of the C Elementary Administrative Office in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Nowon-gu, and entered the above elementary school playground without any justifiable reason, and then was discharged from clothes and brought in panty in the playground.

Accordingly, the defendant intruded on the building managed by others.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement made to D by the police;

1. E statements;

1. A criminal investigation report (or a counter investigation of reported persons);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to photograph suspects who are off of clothes; and

1. Relevant Article 319 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of a fine, and the choice of a fine;

1. Article 10 (2) and Article 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for mitigation of mental disorders;

1. Penalty fine of KRW 1,500,000 to be suspended;

1. Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act for the inducement of a workhouse (in cases of conversion of KRW 100,000 per day);

1. As to the defense counsel’s assertion under Article 59(1) of the Criminal Act (i.e., the Defendant committed the instant crime in a state of mental disorder, the Defendant did not have any criminal record, the Defendant received hospital treatment for about four months immediately after the occurrence of the instant case, and the Defendant and his family members received hospital treatment for about four months after the occurrence of the instant case, the Defendant and his family members are receiving hospital treatment, confession, and reflects the Defendant) of the suspended sentence, the defense counsel asserts that the Defendant did not have the ability to discern things or make decisions due to stimulative disorder at the time of the instant crime, and thus, the Defendant should be acquitted.

However, in light of the contents of the instant crime acknowledged by the evidence, and the Defendant’s words and behavior during the investigation and trial after the occurrence of the instant case.