The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of legal principles or factual errors);

A. At the time of the instant crime, the victim himself/herself did not harm himself/herself, but the Defendant did not have a knife the victim.

B. Even if the defendant had been recognized as having knife the victim, the defendant did not have the intention of murder.

C. As above, the Defendant’s act of knife the victim constitutes self-defense or excessive self-defense.

Even if the defendant had had the intention to murder with domestic affairs, the defendant did not proceed to the crime any longer after the crime of this case. This constitutes an attempted suspension, not an attempted disability.

2. Determination

A. As to the Defendant’s assertion that the Defendant did not have a knife a victim, the Defendant also asserted the same purport as the grounds for appeal in this part, and the lower court rejected the Defendant’s allegation on the ground that the Defendant could sufficiently recognize the fact that the Defendant was knife a victim as stated in the facts charged in the lower judgment at the time of the instant crime, on the grounds that he stated in detail in the fourth to seventh nine.

Examining the above judgment of the court below in light of the evidence duly adopted and examined, the judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and there is no error of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles as alleged by the defendant.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's argument cannot be accepted.

B. Regarding the assertion that there was no intention to commit murder, the intention in the crime of attempted murder includes the perception or prediction of the possibility or risk of causing death to another person, and dolusence of the perception or prediction is recognized even if the perception or prediction is uncertain.

In addition, the defendant had the intention to murder at the time of committing the crime.