2. The crime of this case was committed by the Defendant, while the Defendant had a verbal dispute with the victim who had a relationship with him, murdered the part of the victim with the kitchen knife with the kitchen knife, and abandons the body to the closed fishing place where it is difficult for the person to discover the body.

The fact that the defendant all of the crime of this case is recognized and reflected, and that the defendant has no specific criminal power after being punished as a crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes in around 1996, etc. is favorable to the defendant.

However, considering the fact that the contents of the instant crime are harsh and the result thereof is very serious, the victim took away his life that cannot be compared to those of the instant crime, the bereaved family members of the victim were also in a deep state unable to recover throughout their lives, the bereaved family members of the victim wanted to strong punishment against the Defendant, and the Defendant was punished as a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act by fnching a person on the face of around 1995, there is a history that the victim was punished as a crime of violating the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act.

In full view of all the sentencing conditions in the instant case, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the commission of the crime, and the result of the application of the sentencing guidelines by the Supreme Court Sentencing Committee, it is difficult to deem the sentencing of the lower court to be too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.