All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

Defendant

The Defendant, at the time of the instant crime, was under the influence of alcohol, in a state that the Defendant lacks the ability to discern things or make decisions.

In light of the agreement with the victim of unfair sentencing claim, the sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

In light of the method of committing the instant crime by the prosecutor and the result thereof, the sentence imposed by the lower court against the Defendant is too uneasible and unreasonable.

Judgment

According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below as to the defendant's claim of mental disability, although the defendant could drink at the time of the crime in this case, in light of the fact that the defendant made a relatively detailed statement about the circumstances leading to the crime in this case, and the defendant's situation immediately after the crime was committed [the victim's statement (section 220, 223 of the trial record), the investigation report (section 16 of the trial record), etc., it cannot be seen that the defendant had weak ability to discern things or make decisions under the influence of alcohol at the time of the crime in this case.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's argument cannot be accepted.

Defendant

As to the prosecutor’s assertion of unfair sentencing, the instant crime was committed by the Defendant on the following occasions: (a) four occasions in a mountain knife knife, the victim’s knife, and the knife knife knife were to murder the victim; and (b) did not bring about such intent; and (c) the means and methods of the instant crime were very harsh; and (d) the victim suffered serious injury that may cause damage to the part of fnife knife due to the instant crime, etc.

On the other hand, the victim was sent to a hospital immediately after the crime and received appropriate treatment, and the victim did not remain seriously after the crime, and the defendant was found to have committed the crime in this case, and was erroneous.