beta
Text
Defendant
In addition, all appeals filed by the respondent for attachment order and the prosecutor are dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The Defendant and the person subject to a request for attachment order (hereinafter “Defendant”) 1 were in a state of lacking the ability to discern things or make decisions due to the continued murder of this case at the time of committing the crime of murder of this case. 2) The lower court’s punishment against the Defendant of unreasonable sentencing (two years and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
B. Prosecutor 1) The lower court’s sentence against the Defendant in the part of the Defendant case is too unfasible and unreasonable. 2) The lower court’s dismissal of the Defendant’s request for attachment order of an electronic tracking device against the Defendant even though the risk of recommitting the crime of murder in the part of the attachment order case
2. Determination
A. In the lower court’s judgment as to the Defendant’s claim of mental disability, the lower court determined that the Defendant did not seem to have failed to have the ability to discern things or make decisions due to drinking, in light of the circumstances leading to the Defendant’s crime, the means and method of the crime, the Defendant’s act before and after the crime, the circumstances after the crime, and the Defendant’s statement on the crime, etc., although the Defendant was aware that he had drinking alcohol at the time of committing the crime of murder.
In light of the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, the lower court’s determination is fully acceptable.
Therefore, the defendant's argument of mental disability is without merit.
B. Despite the fact that the defendant had been punished for the suspension of the execution of imprisonment due to the crime of murder committed by the defendant and prosecutor, the defendant tried to kill the above victim on his own house and on the ground of personal appraisal about the victim E, and used the card under the name of the victim company for personal purposes.