2. Examining the various sentencing conditions of this case, the crime of this case was committed in the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant, who was in an internal relationship with the victim, was trying to kill the victim with agrochemicals; (b) the background and content of the crime; (c) the risk of the method of the crime; and (d) the relationship with the victim; and (c) the nature and circumstances of the crime are not easy; and (d) the victim appears to have suffered physical and mental pain and shock due to the crime of this case.

However, in light of the fact that the Defendant committed the crime of this case at the time of committing the crime of this case, the Defendant appears to have been sentenced to a suspended sentence of three years within the scope of the recommended sentence set in the sentencing guidelines, including the Defendant’s age, character, conduct and environment, family relationship, motive, means and consequence of the crime, the circumstances after the crime of this case, and all of the sentencing conditions stated in the arguments of this case, such as the Defendant’s age, character, behavior and environment, family relationship, the motive, means and consequence of the crime of this case, etc., and the lower court appears to have been sentenced to a suspended sentence of three years within the scope of the punishment guidelines, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of three years within the period of imprisonment, the Defendant was sentenced to a prison term of two years and four years and four years and more. In addition, the lower court did not have any special circumstances to change the punishment in the first instance court or to have no changes in circumstances or social circumstances and to impose social treatment and special treatment to the Defendant.