2. The fact that the instant crime was committed contingent, and the fact that the Defendant recognized and reflected the instant crime is favorable to the Defendant.

However, due to a minor dispute, the fact that the defendant takes the victim's chest in a kniff with a knife the most serious life and does not take any measures for recovery of damage for the victim's bereaved families is disadvantageous to the defendant.

The lower court determined the sentence by comprehensively taking account of such circumstances as the sentencing guidelines determined by the Sentencing Committee and other factors as the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive, means and consequence of the instant crime, and the conditions of sentencing as shown in the arguments in the instant case, including the circumstances after the crime.

When the sentencing of the lower court’s judgment is fully taken into account in the first instance court, the lower court’s judgment exceeded the reasonable bounds of discretion.

As there is no change in sentencing conditions that can be deemed unfair to maintain the judgment of the court below as it is, the sentence of the court below cannot be deemed unfair because it is too large.

Therefore, the defendant does not accept the defendant's unfair argument.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit.