A seized knife (No. 1) shall be confiscated.

【Institution of Sanctions】

From around 2012, the Defendant came to be aware of the contact point of D through a person of a clan gathering at a church located in the city of Gyeongnam-si on April 2017, the Defendant came to become aware of the contact point of D through a person of a clan gathering at the church located in the city of Gyeongnam-si.

Around that time, the Defendant received the request from D to the effect that “F is under litigation with other descendants of F, including the victim G (the 44 years of age), with respect to the donation of the F’s property that is the victim of the Japan B, and the victim, the external grandchild of F, who was the victim of F, was able to find the F, by kidnapping the F and causing him to become incapable of being able to do so.” The Defendant prepared the lawsuit related to D’s F’s donation while living together with D in Gangnam-gu H and B 504 of Seoul, Gangnam-gu, Seoul, and sought F’s access to the donation of the F’s property while living together with D, with K and its family members at the vicinity of the Jwon located in Dongjak-gu Seoul, Seoul, which is the victim’s residence, with the victim’s notification source, to monitor the entry of the victim and his family members, and to find F together with D, by attaching the victim’s location to the vehicle through entertainment.

[criminal facts] D had difficulty in getting off the victim's property by preventing the victim from spreading, filing a civil lawsuit, etc. Around June 2017, when the victim abuseded L, his father, the victim gave instructions that "the victim is aware of how to kill the victim over several times" and "the method of murdering the victim" was identified through entertainment, and "the method of murder or murder through the Internet" and "the method of murder through the Internet," even though the victim was committed continuously and supervised, it was impossible to find out F's whereabouts, and it was decided to murder the victim through the victim's mind until the situation where the warrant of detention against D on July 2017 was claimed.

D around the end of July 2017, 2017, at the Gangnam-gu Seoul MN Hotel Syna, Defendant “no longer answers have been made to the lawsuit,” and there is no other person to believe that he will die of G. There is no other person to do so. At the time of death of G, an attorney will be appointed, and an attorney will be responsible for the livelihood of his family members in the future.” The Defendant agreed to do so, and the Defendant was willing to kill the victim.

On August 17, 2017, the Defendant, who received D's teacher, contacted the victim's cell phone that was known from Pyeongtaek D, and introduced the victim's relationship with D, etc., and then, notified the victim of the preparation status of D's lawsuit, and provided the victim with favorable litigation data in the future, and intentionally accessed the victim.

On August 19, 2017, the Defendant visited the victim, and caused the victim to copy the USB containing the data related to D’s lawsuit at the Gangnam-gu Seoul parking lot. On August 20, 2017, the Defendant received 10 million won in cash from the victim’s house used by the victim in Jongno-gu Seoul P as his/her office, and 10 million won in cash from the victim, and she ended at the Seocho-gu Seoul S law Firm Telecommunication to which the victim’s attorney-at-law belongs. The Defendant visited Q and K for the purpose of killing the victim as the above commitment place on August 21, 2017, and then 1: Q and K in the vicinity of the Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government 2000 GM 1:00 GM 200,000 GM 3: The Defendant moved to the above law firm on August 25, 2017.

Kenya changed.

Accordingly, the Defendant murdered the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each protocol of examination of the suspect of K and D by the prosecution (No. 83, 102);

1. Each prosecutor's statement of the defendant and Q (No. 87, 95, 110, No. 110);

1. Each police statement of R and Y (No. 4,46);

1. Recording notes of each recording file (No. 50-1-6, 71-1-3, 73, 84-1-3, 85-1-6, 98-1-2), 1. On-site CCTV CDs (No. 7) and on-site photographs (No. 12)

1. One copy (No. 64), one copy (AR), one copy (No. 65) of the search result (AR), each of the A Q dialogue content (No. 66-1, 95-1)

1. Each investigation report (the method, timing, etc. of the suspect's murder (No. 67), the suspect's mobile phone forensic data (No. 69), recording and sirens, and other matters related to the suspect, such as recorded records and sirens, the "market on the day of the incident", the "market on the day of the incident" (No. 86), and the verification of the results of the DNA mobile phone Internet search (No. 91));

1. Each protocol of seizure and list of seizure (number 2, 3, 15, 16, 20, 21, 23, 24, 26, 27, 32, 33, 39, 40, 58, 59);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes, one copy of the autopsy report (number 9) and one copy of the appraisal report (number 68) to the deceased person G;

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

Article 250(1) of the Criminal Act (Appointment of Imprisonment for Imprisonment)

1. Confiscation;

1. Scope of punishment by law: Imprisonment with prison labor for not less than five years but not more than 30 years;

2. Scope of recommending punishment according to the application of the sentencing criteria: Imprisonment with prison labor for not less than 18 years but not more than 30 years (the recommendation punishment concerning limited imprisonment shall be taken into account as the limited imprisonment has been selected).

[Scope of Recommendation] Category 3 (Murder of Unfash homicide) Aggravation Area ( Imprisonment for not less than 18 years, and life imprisonment or more)

[Special Aggravationd Persons] ○ Aggravated Elements: A planned murder crime

3. Determination of sentence: Determination of sentence: The life of a person 22-year imprisonment is a source of human dignity, and thus, there is absolute existence that cannot be altered under this three-year term. Our law protects the life of a person who is the most valuable value as the highest legal interest. An act infringing on it constitutes a serious crime, regardless of its reason, which is absolutely unacceptable.

The Defendant committed the instant crime of killing the victim after receiving the hearing of D, which was a legal dispute with the victim, with respect to the donation of the property of the conciliation division.

The Defendant did not have any interest, such as a smooth relationship with the victim. Around April 2017, the Defendant did not know of the victim prior to the attempt and attempt of D’s request. Nevertheless, the Defendant received a proposal from D, which the Defendant had intended, to murdered the victim, to pay economic compensation and to support family’s livelihood if he/she were to do so, and subsequently murdered the victim. The Defendant accepted and implemented the victim’s suicide with the intention of gaining economic benefits without serious consideration about the life of the victim.

The Defendant provided materials to assist in the lawsuit with D, thereby having the victim know by approaching the victim, prepared a knife for the crime of this case at the place of crime, as well as planned the crime of this case, such as sending back the atmosphere in which the knife the knife of the knife of the knife of the knife of the knife of the knife of the knife of the knife.

In the presence of an attorney-at-law who works for a low number of people, the Defendant killed the part of the victim’s knife, which was in a conversation with the Defendant, in the presence of an attorney-at-law who was appointed by the Defendant, with a sudden knife. The method was cruel and interviewed and became a big shock in society. Above all, the bereaved family who lost the victim was suffering from a huge mental shock and pain.

The Defendant is a primary offender with no criminal power. The Defendant is late later divided the instant crime into depth, and cooperates in discovering the substantive truth of the instant case. The victim’s bereaved family does not want to punish the Defendant. Even when considering such favorable sentencing factors, the sentence of heavier punishment corresponding to the Defendant’s liability is inevitable.

Other factors of sentencing, such as the age, character and conduct, environment, relationship with the victim, motive, means and result of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, shall be determined as ordered in comprehensive consideration.

Judges Gin-type money

Judges Shin Jae-ho