In addition, all appeals filed by the person who requested the attachment order and the prosecutor are dismissed.

A. Defendant and the respondent for an attachment order (hereinafter “Defendant”) committed an assault against the victim, not a diversity, but a wooden mons, and the Defendant did not attract the victim from the vehicle to the forest, and did not direct the victim’s timber. The Defendant did not have the intent of murder.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of attempted murder among the facts charged of this case is erroneous by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the judgment.

2) The punishment sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (one hundred years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below against the defendant is too unfortunate and unfair.

2. Determination on the defendant's case

A. 1) Determination on the Defendant’s assertion of misunderstanding of facts does not necessarily require the purpose of murder or the intent of planned murder, but there was an intentional intent if the Defendant knew or predicted that there was a possibility or risk of causing another’s death due to his/her act, such as his/her own assault, etc.

may be filed.

In a case where the Defendant asserted that there was no intention of murder at the time of committing the crime, and only the Defendant was only the intention of murder or assault, the determination of whether there was the intention of murder should be made by taking full account of the objective circumstances before and after committing the crime, such as the background leading up to the crime, motive, existence of the crime, type and usage of the prepared deadly weapon, the fear and repetition of the attack, the likelihood of the occurrence of the result of the crime, the existence of the consequence of the crime, and the existence of the act of avoidance after committing the crime (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Do535, Oct. 29, 2015). 2) The lower court’s judgment and the lower court’s judgment and the evidence duly adopted and examined by the first instance court, as well as the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence.