All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

A. Defendant: Aggravation of sentencing

B. Prosecutor: Sentencing light;

2. Since the life of a person on board is the highest value that the State or society should protect, an act of infringing on it cannot be used for any reason. The crime of this case is a reason for sentencing unfavorable to the defendant, that the defendant gets knife a knife and murdered the victim once, and that the crime of this case is not less complicated.

However, the first instance court: (a) comprehensively takes into account the following circumstances: (b) the Defendant’s act after the truth-finding, and reflects the Defendant’s behavior; (c) the Defendant appears to have committed a contingent crime by taking a bath and assault from the victim living together; and (d) the victim’s parent (the parent of the Defendant is the parent of the Defendant) among his bereaved family members; and (c) various sentencing conditions including the Defendant’s age, character, conduct, criminal record, occupation and environment; and (d) the scope of sentencing guidelines for the crime of murder in the sentencing guidelines established by the Supreme Court, on the grounds that the scope of sentencing measures falls under “the mitigated area” of “Class 2” among the sentencing guidelines for the crime of murder in the sentencing guidelines established by the Supreme Court, the scope of sentencing measures is 7 to 12 years.

In addition, considering the fact that the defendant has been sentenced to a punishment of 8 years within the scope of imprisonment with prison labor and that the defendant has led to a confession of all of the crimes of this case and that the parent of the defendant intends to leave the property for the victim's children who are the bereaved family members (the defendant's children are the bereaved family members), the sentence imposed on the defendant by the first instance court is deemed appropriate and it is not deemed unreasonable because it is too heavy or too unreasonable in light of all the sentencing materials in the records of this case.

Therefore, the defendant and the prosecutor's argument are without merit.

3. Conclusion, the defendant and the prosecutor.