A seized kitchen shall be confiscated by one kitchen (No. 1).

The defendant, as a Chinese citizen from North Korea, recruited North Korean defectors (hereinafter referred to as "North Korean defectors"), and introduced them to the victim Kim ○○ (37 years of age) who is the victim Kim ○ (hereinafter referred to as "North Korean defectors"), and received 600,000 won per citizen of North Korean defectors, and the victim took an action to bring them into Korea after receiving 2.5 million or three million won per citizen of North Korean defectors, and the defendant and the victim have been working for about 2 to 3 years. However, the defendant had been working with four North Korean defectors such as Ha○, etc., who introduced the victim to the victim, requested 3 million won each time of entry into Korea to require 3 million won each, and the victim did not report 2.5 million won or more for 2.5 million won or more for 2.5 million won or more for 2.5 million won or more for 2.5 million won or more for 2.5 million won, the defendant did not report 'the victim and the victim did not report 's phone within China.'

On December 4, 2014: at around 55, the Defendant: (a) stated that, “the victim ought to take part in her course at the front of the afforestation station located in Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan City Do Do Do Do ,” and that, in advance, the Defendant was attempted to take part in the victim’s side knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife k

Summary of Evidence

Omission

Application of Statutes

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

Articles 254 and 250(1) of the Criminal Act

1. Statutory mitigation;

Articles 25(2) and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act (Attempted Crime)

1. Confiscation;

Article 48 (1) 1 of the Criminal Act

Judgment on the argument of the defendant and defense counsel

1. Defendant and his defense counsel’s assertion

At the time of the crime of this case, the Defendant was only the victim with the intent to commit the crime of this case, and did not have the intent to commit murder.

2. Determination;

The intent of murder is not necessarily recognized as a purpose of murder or a planned intention of murder, but rather it is possible or predicted that there exists a possibility or risk of causing another person's death due to one's own act, and its perception or prediction is conclusive, as well as a so-called willful negligence even if it is uncertain. In a case where the defendant asserts that there was no criminal intent of murder at the time of the crime, and only there was only the criminal intent of bodily injury or assault, whether the defendant was guilty of murder at the time of the crime should be determined by taking into account the objective circumstances before and after the crime, such as the background leading up to the crime, motive, type and usage of the prepared deadly weapon, the part and repetition of the attack, and the possibility of causing the death (see Supreme Court Decision 2010Do15144, Jan. 13, 2011, etc.).

In light of the above legal principles, the following circumstances are examined as to whether the Defendant had the intent to commit murder, and the kitchen gate used by the Defendant for the crime of this case, i.e., (1) the kitchen gate used by the Defendant reaches 18 centimeters in length; (2) the Defendant, while the Defendant and the victim meted the Defendant’s part of the Defendant’s ship in the state of drinking with the victim, but caused the wind by the Defendant’s back, and (3) the Defendant only attempted to cover the part of the victim’s buckbucks, but did not want to cover the part of the Defendant’s buckbucks. However, considering that the Defendant’s name was more advanced than the victim, it does not appear that the Defendant had taken a natural attitude, but even if it was difficult for the Defendant to take the part of the Defendant’s 7 centimeters in the crime of this case, even if it was difficult for him to take the part of the Defendant’s buckbucks.

In light of the fact that the victim seems to have been injured due to considerable force, ⑤ the defendant was in possession of the kitchen knife with the calendar at the time of committing the crime of this case, and that he was unable to identify his own form by wearing her cap and mast, ② the defendant, immediately after committing the crime of this case, she took into account the fact that the victim took a knife with the victim, and the details that the defendant told the victim at the time of committing the crime of this case, it is reasonable to deem that the defendant had the intention to kill the victim. Accordingly, the above argument by the defendant and the defense counsel

1. Reasons for sentencing: Imprisonment with prison labor for a period of two years and six months to fifteen years;

2. Scope of applicable sentences according to the sentencing criteria;

[Determination of Type] homicide, Ordinary homicide (Type 2)

【No Special Convicted Person】

[Decision of Recommendation] Imprisonment of 3 years and 1 April) to 2 years and 10)

3. According to the sentence decision, the defendant tried not to be exposed to his face by wearing her mother at the time of committing the crime, and it appears that the defendant prepared the kitchen knife, which was used for the crime, in the form of a booming the kitchen knife, etc., and the defendant's motive leading to committing the crime of this case is not easy, and the victim suffered injury requiring about four weeks' medical treatment due to the crime of this case, and the mental shock is also reasonable, and even until now, the defendant is strongly punished against the defendant: Provided, That the defendant is highly old, the health status is not good, and the defendant's depth is repenting with the crime of this case, etc., which is favorable to the defendant, and the sentence against the defendant shall be determined by considering all of the above sentencing factors, other than the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, etc.

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.

Judges Kim Jae-in

Judge Lee Ho-hoon

2) Since an attempted crime, 2/3 of the year, which is the lowest limit of the recommended sentence on the sentencing guidelines, shall be applied.