A. Defendant 1) The Defendant committed the instant crime in a state of mental and physical weakness.

2) The sentence of the lower court (16 years of imprisonment, confiscation) is too heavy.

B. Prosecutor: The sentence of the lower court is too minor.

2. Determination

A. In light of various circumstances such as the Defendant’s background leading up to the instant crime and his behavior before and after the instant crime, which is acknowledged by the record as to the Defendant’s mental and physical weakness, the Defendant failed to have the ability to discern things or make decisions at the time of the instant crime.

It does not seem that it does not appear.

B. Determination of unfair sentencing by the Defendant and the Prosecutor on the grounds of statutory penalty is based on the discretionary determination that takes place within a reasonable and appropriate scope, taking into account the factors constituting conditions for sentencing under Article 51 of the Criminal Act, on the basis of statutory penalty.

However, considering the unique area of sentencing of sentencing of the first instance that is respected under the principle of trial priority and the principle of direct jurisdiction taken by our criminal litigation law and the nature of the ex post facto review of the appellate court, the sentencing of sentencing of the first instance was exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion when comprehensively taking into account the factors and guidelines for sentencing specified in the first instance sentencing trial process.

In light of the records newly discovered in the course of the appellate court’s sentencing hearing, it is reasonable to file an unfair judgment of the first instance court, only in cases where it is deemed unfair to maintain the sentencing of the first instance court as it is for the court to judge the sentencing of the first instance court.

Unless there exist such exceptional circumstances, it is desirable to respect the first instance sentencing determination (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The lower court, based on its stated reasoning, sentenced the above sentence to the Defendant with regard to the sentencing, and the circumstances favorable or unfavorable to the sentencing alleged in the trial by the Defendant and the prosecutor are already considered by the lower court.