A. The Defendant misunderstanding the fact that he stolen the Defendant’s money.

I think, in the process of pursuing it, only put the knife of the knife of the knife, and did not have the intention to kill the victim.

However, the court below erred by misunderstanding the fact that the court below acknowledged the defendant's intentional murder.

B. At the time of committing the instant crime with mental and physical weakness, the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol and had weak intent or ability to discern things.

(c)

The punishment sentenced by the court below (three years of imprisonment, confiscation) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion that there was no intention to commit murder at the lower court’s trial, the lower court acknowledged that the Defendant committed the instant crime with the intent to kill the victim at least with the intention to kill the victim, by explaining detailed circumstances in the third 14 through 6th 1 of the judgment, with the intent of sufficiently recognizing that the Defendant had a knife of the victim’s knife with the victim’s knife in mind.

Examining the various circumstances admitted by the court below in comparison with the evidence duly adopted and examined, the above judgment of the court below is just and acceptable.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below contains an error of mistake as alleged by the defendant.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.

B. According to the record of determination on the assertion of mental and physical weakness, even though the defendant was in a state of drinking alcohol at the time of the crime of this case, in light of the content of the statement by the defendant and the victim, the process and method of the crime, and the circumstances before and after the crime, etc., it cannot be deemed that the defendant's ability to discern things or make decisions has been weak

Therefore, this part of the defendant's argument is without merit.

(c)

The defendant is under the influence of the judgment on the illegal argument of sentencing.