A. Defendant 1) The punishment ought to be mitigated on the grounds that he was under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the instant crime with mental disorder, and such physical and physical loss or mental weakness.

2) The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (a 12-year imprisonment, etc.) is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below on the defendant (12 years of imprisonment, etc.) is too unhued and unfair.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below, the defendant was under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the instant crime.

However, in light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the above evidence: (a) the motive and circumstance leading up to the Defendant’s commission of the instant crime at an investigative agency; (b) the Defendant’s act at the time of the commission of the instant crime; and (c) the background and method of the instant crime; (d) the Defendant’s act before and after the instant crime; and (e) the Defendant’s statement attitude in the investigative agency, etc., the Defendant was in a state that he lost or lacks the ability to discern things

shall not be deemed to exist.

Therefore, the defendant's mental disorder is without merit.

B. The lower court committed the instant crime, i.e., the Defendant: (a) committed an unlawful determination on the Defendant and the Prosecutor’s assertion of sentencing; (b) the Defendant committed the instant crime with a knife having a knife return to the restaurant run by the Defendant, which has a considerable distance from the victim’s dwelling place, after putting the victim at the underground parking lot of the victim’s dwelling; and

In other words, it is the intention of preparing deadly weapons in advance rather than murdering the victim by sacrificing rapidly.

- After the knife of a victim who was in a state of knife due to diving, the son of the victim became aware of it and the defendant.