The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although the Defendant did not have had intention to murder at the time of the instant case, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts, thereby convicting the Defendant of the instant facts charged.

B. At the time of the instant case, the Defendant was in the state of having no or weak ability to discern things or make decisions.

C. The sentence imposed by the lower court (six years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) The lower court denied the Defendant’s intentional murder at the lower court’s judgment. On the following grounds, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the instant charges by deeming that the Defendant had the intent to murder at the time of committing the instant crime. The criminal intent of murder does not necessarily require the intent of murder or planned murder. It is sufficient to recognize or anticipate the possibility or risk of causing another’s death due to one’s own act, and its recognition or predictability is not definite, but it is not only conclusive but also it is so-called willful negligence (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Do9867, Feb. 26, 2009). This case’s health stand, which was duly adopted and investigated by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, i.e.,, the Defendant, from the front door of the studio where the victim D resides to the wall and its floor to the extent of 2 meters high in inflammable or inflammable substance at the time of the instant crime, and, at the time of the instant crime, 30-pl and plastic plastic substance.