• The Journal of Bigdata
• /
• v.8 no.1
• /
• pp.11-22
• /
• 2023

This research aimed to examine the public's perception of the "rate of sentence reduction for reasons of mental and physical weakness" and investigate if it aligns with the actual practice. Various sources, such as the Supreme Court's Courtnet search system, the number of mental evaluation requests, and the number of articles and comments related to "mental weakness" on Naver News were utilized for the analysis. The findings indicate that the public has a negative opinion on reducing sentences due to mental and physical weakness, and they are dissatisfied with the vagueness of the standards. However, this study also confirms that the court strictly applies the reduction of responsibility for individuals with mental disabilities specified in Article 10 of the Criminal Act based on the analysis of actual judgments and the number of requests for psychiatric evaluation. In other words, even though the recognition of perpetrators' mental disorders is declining, the public does not seem to recognize this trend. This creates a negative impact on the public's trust in state institutions. Therefore, law enforcement agencies, such as the police and prosecutors, need to enforce the law according to clear standards to gain public trust. The judiciary also needs to make a firm decision on commuting sentences for mentally and physically infirm individuals and inform the public of the outcomes of its application.