The argument that the lower court’s determination of sentencing contains an error of misunderstanding of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles, balanced balance of crimes, or violation of the principle of responsibility is ultimately an unfair argument for sentencing.

However, considering various circumstances, such as the Defendant’s age character and conduct, intelligence and environment, relationship with the victim, motive means and consequence of the instant crime, and circumstances after the crime, the determination of the sentence of the lower court, which maintained the first instance judgment that sentenced the Defendant to imprisonment with prison labor, is extremely unfair, even when considering the circumstances asserted by the Defendant and the national defense counsel.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.