Dilemmas that arise from the thesis put forward by the Court of Appeal in Gdansk in the judgment of 17 July 2019 are the basis of the comment. A starting point for consideration may be the method adopted by the Court to understand the ability to recognize the meaning of an act and the ability to direct a conduct by the perpetrator of a prohibited act, constituting a psychological element of the statutory determination of significantly diminished sanity (Article 31 § 2 of the Penal Code). In the light of the commented judgment, their presentation seems to deserve approval prima facie. However, their determination by the
court as ‘states’, as well as perception of ‘relevant circumstances’ affecting the punishment rises reasonable doubts. The aim of this study is to show these doubts, as well as to draw conclusions about the legitimacy of this position on the basis of a dogmatic and legal analysis
of the issue of diminished sanity.