Although the defense counsel argues that there was an error of law by mistake and omission of determination as to the inducing act of the victim, this argument constitutes the allegation of unfair sentencing.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2016Do6466 Decided August 25, 2016). 2. Examining the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court, the fact that “the Defendant unilaterally raised a knife” was a fighting match between the Defendant and the victim in light of the on-site situation, contrary to the victim’s assertion, in light of the fact that “the Defendant unilaterally committed a knife” was found.

In addition, the defendant recognizes the crime of this case as a substitute, and repents his mistake.

After three hours from the crime of this case, the Defendant voluntarily reported to the police and voluntarily surrendered.

The Defendant appears to have committed the instant crime somewhat contingently.

The instant crime was attempted.

The defendant paid 7 million won with the agreed amount, and the victim does not want the punishment of the defendant.

These points are favorable to the defendant.

However, the crime of this case is a knife knife with a length of 28.5 cm, causing serious danger to the life of the victim by fnife, resulting in serious danger to the life of the victim. Therefore, the nature and circumstances of the crime of this case are not good, and the victim seems to have suffered considerable physical and mental pain due to the crime of this case.

The defendant had been punished for violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act while putting knife a knife and knife around him/her for the purpose of causing harm to others even before.

These points are disadvantageous to the defendant.