The sentence of the lower court (five years of imprisonment, confiscation) is too heavy or unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The sentencing guidelines established by the Sentencing Commission on the basis of Articles 81-2 and 81-6 of the Court Organization Act (hereinafter “Sentencing guidelines”) are “reasonable, concrete, objective setting” through “procedures prescribed by the Act” and “public disclosure” in order to realize “fair, objective sentencing that citizens may trust” and the judges shall respect the sentencing guidelines when they choose the type of punishment and determine the sentence.

(See Articles 81-2 through 81-12 of the Court Organization Act). In a case where the reasons for sentencing are to be entered in the written judgment as a result of a judgment deviating from the sentencing criteria, the court shall enter the reasons in a way that indicates the reasons for the sentencing in question in a reasonable and persuasive manner, taking into account the significance, effect, etc.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Do7410, Dec. 9, 2010). B.

The recommendation type of imprisonment according to the sentencing guidelines for the instant crime is appropriate for the scope of recommendation and its standard according to the sentencing guidelines for the instant crime: the crime of attempted murder [decision of a sentence] type 2 of the crime of attempted murder [the crime of attempted murder], the crime of attempted murder [the scope of recommending punishment], the mitigated area of punishment [the scope of recommending punishment], the crime of attempted murder [the mitigated area], the mitigated area of imprisonment 2 years and 4 months to 2/3 years (the lowest limit is 1/3, the maximum limit is 2/3, and the case is reduced to 2/3). Special intimidation [the decision of a sentence]] types 4 of the crime of intimidation [the crime of intimidation [special mitigation] [the victim] where the victim is fully responsible for the occurrence or expansion of damage and injury.