Text
All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant 1) misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles did not intend to kill the victim at the time of the instant crime. 2) The lower court’s imprisonment (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
B. The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court is too unhued and unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. 1) As to the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, the intent of murder in the relevant legal doctrine does not necessarily require the intention of murder or planned murder. It is sufficient to recognize or anticipate the possibility or risk of causing death of another person due to his own act, and its recognition or prediction is not only conclusive but also it is so-called dolusent intent. In a case where the Defendant asserts that there was only no criminal intent of murder or assault at the time of committing the crime, and that there was only the criminal intent of murder or assault, whether or not the Defendant had the criminal intent of murder at the time of committing the crime should be determined by taking into account the objective circumstances before and after committing the crime, such as the background leading up to the crime, motive, type and method of the crime, the nature and repetition of the prepared deadly weapon, and the possibility of causing death (Supreme Court Decision 2006Do734, Apr. 14, 206).
A) At the time of committing the instant crime, the Defendant heard the victim’s desire to respect himself/herself, who had shown his/her bad attitude at the time of committing the instant crime, and took part in his/her mind (the Defendant was the police at the time of committing the instant crime.