A. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor (two years of imprisonment) is too unhued and unfair.

B. After the judgment of the court below was rendered, the defendant's defense counsel submitted a petition of appeal stating the purport that the defendant had no intention to murder, and that the sentence of the court below is more severe, but the defendant submitted a letter of withdrawal of appeal to the warden of the Daegu School on November 27, 2020.

Comprehensively taking account of the Defendant’s medical history and progress of treatment, details of the crime, the Defendant’s attitude and statement in the first instance court and the court of the trial, and the Defendant’s opinions, there was litigation capacity at the time when the Defendant submitted a written withdrawal of appeal.

Therefore, his appeal is valid.

Even if the withdrawal of the Defendant’s appeal is null and void, the Defendant’s appeal cannot be accepted as seen in the following 2-B.

2. Determination

A. The instant crime of this case with respect to the prosecutor’s appeal is obvious that the Defendant attempted to murder a number of knife victims who do not have any awareness of snife, but the crime is very poor to have been committed, and that the victim suffered serious mental and physical pain.

However, the defendant committed the crime of this case under the lack of the ability to discern things or make decisions due to the symptoms of early illness, the crime of this case is committed in attempted crimes, the defendant's agreement with the victim does not want the punishment of the defendant, and the fact that the defendant is the first offender is favorable to the defendant.

In addition, comprehensively taking into account the following factors: the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive, means and consequence of the commission of the crime, the circumstances after the commission of the crime, etc., and the various sentencing conditions indicated in the theory of changes, the sentence imposed by the lower court cannot be deemed to be unfair because it is too uneasible and too unreasonable.

Therefore, the prosecutor's improper argument of sentencing is not accepted.

B. Preliminary decision on the Defendant’s appeal 1) is ancillary.