In light of the evidence, the court below found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case did not err by misapprehending the legal principles as to the intention of murder in violation of logical and empirical rules, as alleged in the grounds of appeal.

In addition, examining various circumstances that are conditions for sentencing, such as the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, relationship with the victim, motive, means and consequence of the instant crime, and the circumstances after the instant crime, there is a substantial reason to recognize that the lower court’s sentencing, which maintained the first instance court’s judgment that sentenced 16 years to imprisonment with prison labor, is extremely unfair even when considering the various circumstances asserted by the Defendant and the defense counsel.

subsection (b) of this section.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.