The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

Two seized knife (No. 1) shall be confiscated.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) misunderstanding of the facts and misapprehension of the legal doctrine did not intend to murder the victim. Therefore, the judgment below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to the intentional murder or by misapprehending the legal principles.

2) The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (three years and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below against the defendant is too unfortunate and unfair.

2. Determination

A. 1) The Defendant’s misunderstanding of the facts and misapprehension of the legal doctrine is not necessarily deemed to have the purpose of murder or the intention of planned murder, but there was an intentional intent if the Defendant knew or predicted the possibility or risk of causing the death of another person due to his/her own act, such as his/her own assault, etc.

may be filed.

In a case where the Defendant asserted that there was no murder intent at the time of committing the crime, and only the Defendant was only the intentional murder or assault committed, the determination should be made by taking full account of the objective circumstances before and after committing the crime, such as the background leading up to the crime, motive for the crime, existence of a deadly weapon prepared, type and usage of a deadly weapon, the fear and repetition of an attack, the likelihood of the occurrence of the result of the crime, the existence of a voluntary act as a result of the crime, and the existence of a voluntary act as a result of the crime (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Do5355, Oct. 29, 2015). 2) In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, the Defendant was aware at least of the possibility or risk of the death of the victim by his own act at the time of committing the instant crime.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the charge of attempted murder of this case is just, and it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.