2019 Highest 153 Murders, attempted murders, present main building, fire-prevention, and present cases

Fire prevention, special injury, property damage and damage;

2019Gohap154 (Joint Violence)

2019Gohap155(Joint) Special Violence, Property Damage and Damage

A

The number of changes, Park Jin-Jin, Kim Jong-J (Public Prosecution), Park Jong-Jin, Park Jong-Jin, Park Jong-Jin, Park Jong-Jin (Public Trial)

Attorney B (Korean National Assembly)

Attorney C (Korean National Assembly)

November 27, 2019

A defendant shall be punished by death.

The seized knife (No. 1), knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife kn

Criminal facts

"2019 Gohap153"

1. The crime committed on March 12, 2019;

On March 12, 2019, around 19:35, the Defendant: (a) considered the victim’s house of the victim G in Jinju-si D apartment Edong EF, inciting the same resident, and thought that the victim instigatess the same resident and bullyings the Defendant’s house, and booms the Defendant’s house, and (b) dumping the body mixed with the head, portrait, garbage, etc. into the Fhogate and the hallway’s window, so that the Defendant could not temporarily use the frogate, etc. by spreading it to the front door and the hallway’s window.

2. The crime committed on April 17, 2019;

【Institution of Sanctions】

Around 2008, the Defendant was frodd by the complaint that only the Defendant was fluorded due to the failure to receive industrial accident compensation, and the employment was frodd by the complaint that only the Defendant was fluded by an unfair contact. Since then, even though the employment was difficult due to the above fludial injury, the family fluding away the Defendant, resulting in a poor situation that the family members have to live in the fludal and living in the fludal of the Defendant, and the family fluding away from the Defendant, led to the awareness that the other people were deprived of the Defendant, and that the other families were fludd by the fludial flu

[Relationship with the E-Dong Residents of this case]

Even after having moved in the D Apartment E E from Jinju around December 2016, the Defendant was suffering from the perception that the same residents were trio and luscing, flucing and rashing the Defendant who lives at the expense of basic supply and demand. In particular, the Defendant thought that the Defendant led the Victim G and the Victim I to the upper house building in the same F, and that he led it, from September 2018 to September 2018, the Defendant continued to bullying the above victims, such as ging garbage in front of the Fhogate, ging the victim’s instructions, driving away from the victim G, and driving away from the victim I. As a result, the Defendant continued to bullying the victims, such as grading the waste in front of the Fhogate, ging the victim into the victim G. When he is paid attention from the employees or police officers of the management office or police officers.

On the other hand, the Defendant: (a) around that time, when the victim K, who was living in the same subparagraph J of the same subparagraph, resisted the Defendant as the victims of the victims who were living in the victim K-do F, and thought that he was bullying, and she was flicked to the victim K-W and his her her her son; (b) the Defendant was flicked with the Defendant’s flicked with the Defendant’s flicked with the Defendant’s flicked with the Defendant’s flicked with the Defendant’s flicked with the Defendant’s flicked with the Defendant’s flicked with the Defendant’s flick; and (c) the Defendant was flicked with the Defendant’s flicked with the Defendant’s flicked with the Defendant’s flick with the Defendant’s flick with the Defendant’s flicked with the Defendant’s flick.

【Plan for the instant crime】

As above, the Defendant did not attend any longer while raising the labor for the above E-dong residents with the centering around the above victims. On March 2019, the Defendant tried to kill the above victims in knife Fhos, Jhos, and M with their knife with their knife, first among Dong residents, who were in the same state where fire is evacuated with the Defendant’s house, and who evacuated with the Defendant’s house in the state of no damage.

The Defendant purchased gasoline at the gas station around that time and kept one oil tank in the house of the Defendant and the house of the Defendant, which was discarded in a place that can not be seen for the purpose of this use. On March 2019, the Defendant purchased one knife (34cm in total length, 21cm in knife length) and one knife (24cm in total length, 11cm in knife length) from the kitchen product in the T market at Jinju around 20:30, the Defendant purchased one knife (24cm in total length, 11cm in knife length).

【Implementation of the instant crime】

On April 17, 2019, at around 00:51, the Defendant moved to commit the crime planned as above, purchased gasoline to be used for committing the crime at an accelerator located in Jin-si U located in approximately three meters away from the Defendant’s house, and stored it in the oil tank under custody as above, and then returned to the house of 01:50 on the same day, and tried to start the crime at a time when the same residents, such as the Defendant returned to the house of 01:50 warningers, could have deeply impaired.

(a) Injury resulting from the present building or fire;

On April 17, 2019, at the Defendant’s house around 04:25, the Defendant: (a) destroyed the instant E-dong building used as a residence by 80 households, including V, etc., by putting the gasoline purchased as above at the Defendant’s house, galling the gasoline in the kitchen, the kitchen and the ward in front of the front of the front door, and attaching a one-time throwter to a long-term newspaper in the front of the front door in the shape of the front door; and (b) raising the fire into the front door of the Defendant’s house (56.8m). Accordingly, the Defendant suffered injury to the victims, such as the toxicity effect of the oxygen in which it is impossible to know the days of treatment to the victim W (48 years of age) as indicated in the attached list of crimes.

(b) homicide or attempted murder;

The Defendant, like paragraph A, laid down the Defendant’s house, immediately moved to the second floor emergency stairs, and knife the knife and knife that he prepared as above, divided the knife and knife into the two hand, and evacuated the victims of the F, J, and Mho.

1) Crimes against the victims of FJE

On April 17, 2019, at around 04:29, the Defendant: (a) sent the victim I (n, 19 years of age), and the victim G (n, 53 years of age) to two knife two knifes; and (b) taken the part of the victim G G in the direction of the first floor; (c) taken each shelter in the direction of the second floor of the victim G in the direction of the second floor; (d) the victim I escaped from the victim I to the direction of the second floor of the second floor; and (e) the victim I knife two knife due to delay before the fire extinguishing of the second floor of the second floor; and (e) the victim I knife and the chest part of the breast part of the victim I knife.

As a result, the Defendant attempted to murder the victim G, but did not escape the victim G and did not perform that purpose, and did not inflict any injury such as the multiple diverosis damage for about four weeks of treatment to the victim G, and caused the victim I to kill the victim I by causing the victim I to die of an excessive actual blood relative from the place of the murder.

2) Crimes against the victims of self-defense

At around 04:30 on April 17, 2019, the Defendant, at the middle stairs of the second and third floor E-dong E-dong 2 and the third floor, followed by the victim K (n, 59 years of age), and the victim L (n, 31 years of age) two knife two knifes, and reported and evacuateed the victim L from the middle stairs of the first and second floor, followed by two knife from the victim L to the middle stairs of the first and second floor.

As a result, the Defendant attempted to murder the victim L, but thought that the victim L was dead, did not leave the floor, and did not have the intent to do so, and caused the victim L to attempted bodily injury, such as the damage of the detailed unknown parts of the number necessary for treatment for about 16 weeks, and caused the victim K to die of an excessive blood relative due to face face face face satis, etc. on the job.

3) Crimes against the victims of Mad Family

On April 17, 2019, at around 04:33 on April 17, 2019, the Defendant: (a) from the middle stairs of the second and third floors, the victim S (n, 12 years of age), and the victim R (n, 41 years of age) spreads two knife two knifes; (b) the head and face of the victim S; (c) the body knife the body knife; and (d) the victim R knife two knifes in order to protect the victim S who is his father; and (c) the victim R knife two knife. The Defendant continued to have knife and two knife the victim S, who is his grandchild, and the Defendant followed the victim, and knife the victim P’s face and face.

Accordingly, the Defendant attempted to kill the victim R, but did not escape the victim R and did not achieve its purpose, and caused the victim R to commit an attempted crime by causing bodily injury, such as the side part of the mouth, where the number of treatment days cannot be known, and caused the victim S to die by making the victim P die an excessive blood relative caused by the diversified salute, such as a wooden salute, and an excessive blood relative caused by the light salute, etc.

4) Crimes against victims of Xho Lake

On April 17, 2019, at around 04:36, the Defendant discovered the Defendant with the victim Y(74 years of age), and the victim 7 years of age(72 years of age) from the emergency stairs of the second E-dong E-dong E-dong, followed several faces of the victim Y in order to protect the victim Y, by blocking the Defendant, Y, knife the two knife, knife the victim Y, knife the part of the victim Y, knife the part of the victim Y, and knife the victim Y.

이윽고 피고인은 피해자 Y이 더 이상 저항하지 못하고 2층 복도 벽면에 기댄 채로 주저앉자 칼로 피해자 Y의 목 부위를 겨냥하여 수회 찔렀다.

Then, the defendant reported the shape of the elevator from the third floor in order to evacuate the victim Z outside of the building, divided the elevator boarding gun into the second floor, and the elevator stops, and the door strings the part of the victim with the heat knife knife, and the part of the victim knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knif

As a result, the Defendant attempted to kill the victim's Z, but did not go against the police officers dispatched, and did so, caused the victim's death with an excessive blood relative due to his own Y from the site, and caused the victim's death with an excessive blood relative due to his own Y.

(c) An special injury;

1) Victim AA

On April 17, 2019, at around 04:32, the Defendant inflicted injury on the victim AA (29 years of age) and the victim of matosa, an apartment management office, who was an employee of the apartment management office, who received fire alerts before the fourth floor of the E-dong, and evacuated the residents, such as “whether he was discharged from the management office,” and “whether he was discharged to the employees,” and “whether he was discharged from the management office,” and “at the end, he was discharged to the employees.” On one occasion, the Defendant inflicted on the victim’s knife, which is a dangerous object, such as knife, in need of medical treatment for about 36 days from the victim.

2) Victim AB

On April 17, 2019, the Defendant inflicted injury on the victim AB (n, 59 years old) who took shelter of a fire warning around the second floor of the E-dong, and on the knife, the victim’s knife knife, which is a dangerous object, and the part of the knife, the victim’s knife and the part of the knife, which requires treatment for about 14 days to the victim, respectively.

"2019 Gohap154"

피고인은 2019. 1. 17. 16:48경 경남 진주시 AC에 있는 'AD 센터'에서, 위 센터에서 근무하는 피해자 AE(여, 27세)가 과거 피고인에게 약을 탄 커피를 주었다는 취지로 항의를 하다가 화가 나 오른손으로 피해자의 얼굴을 1회 때리고, 이를 말리던 위 센터 직원 피해자 AF(39세)의 얼굴을 머리로 2회 들이받은 후, 오른쪽 골반을 발로 1회 찼으며, 계속하여 피고인을 제지하려는 사회복무요원인 피해자 AG(22세)의 얼굴을 머리로 1회 들이받았다.

Accordingly, the defendant assaulted victims.

2019 Highest 155

On March 10, 2019, around 22:23, the Defendant: (a) taken a cell phone with illegal vehicles parked in AH on the report, and the victim AJ (the 34 years old), the main owner of the relevant house, was the victim’s vehicle, to delete the description of the vehicle, and to delete the description of the vehicle to be moved.

The defendant assaulted the victim AK (Nam and age 39) who was the owner of a vehicle who was drinking alcohol in a hump because of the reporting reward, and made a speech to criticize himself on the ground that he was in possession of his possession, and then threatened the victim AK's face at the time of being 5-6 times in drinking, such as threatening the victim AK's face at the time of being 5-6 times in drinking, and continuously harming the victim AJ's face that flabing the shape, and harming the victim AJ's cell phone that was tightly sealed and boomed by hand, and damaged the back part of the cell phone amount equivalent to approximately 30,000 won in repair cost by cutting the cell phone of the victim AJ, which was trying to take the form, on its own floor.

In addition, the victim AL (at, 40 years of age) who met it next to it was frighting back and assaulted at a drinking house once.

Summary of Evidence

"2019 Gohap153"

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each legal statement of the witness AM, N, R,N, AP;

1. Each prosecutor's protocol of statement (Evidence 211, 217, 353, 365, 367) against Q, AR, AS,O, AT, AU, and AV;

1. Each police statement (Evidence 2, 12, 16, 28, 29, 29, 112, 13, 116, 119, 117, 136, 138, 138, 139, 138, 139, 139, 149, 140, 140, 159, 159, 159, 209, B, B, B, B, B, B, B, B, B, B, B, B, B, B, B, B, B, B, 33, 107, 109, 109, 11231, 136, 138, 140, 159, 204 of the evidence list);

1. WN, BO, AY, BP, W, Q, BR, BTS, BU (Evidence No. 19,23,30,31, 32, 34, 150 through 154)

1. Recording recording (No. 326 of the evidence list);

1. A report on occurrence (damage and destruction) and a table of 112 reported cases processing (Evidence Nos. 5, 243);

1. Each protocol of seizure (Evidence Nos. 8, 9, 85, 86, 101, 102) and photographs of seized articles (Evidence Nos. 10, 80);

1. On-site photographs, etc. (Evidence Nos. 4, 46, 57, 104), on-site photographs, and requests for genetic assessment (Evidence Nos. 53 through 56);

1. Each body photograph (Evidence List Nos. 14, 17, 21, 24, 27), each body autopsy report (Evidence List Nos. 15, 18, 22), each body autopsy report (Evidence List Nos. 273 through 277), each body autopsy report (Evidence List Nos. 48 through 52), and each death diagnosis report (Evidence List No. 11, 25);

1. Each medical certificate (Evidence Nos. 108, 110, 111, 117, 120, 141, 160, 174, 179, 205, 206, 317, 318, and 323) and each medical record certificate (Evidence No. 118, 121, and 172 in the list of evidence), victim Z of medical records, etc. (Evidence No. 207 in the list of evidence), appraisal and commission (Evidence No. 114 in the list of evidence);

1. A report on the investigation of sentencing (Nos. 378 of evidence lists);

1. Each field identification report (Evidence Nos. 45 and 103), response to a request for appraisal at a fire site (Evidence No. 58), legal safety appraisal report (Evidence No. 59), each law chemical appraisal report (Evidence No. 60, 188, 192, and 202) and each appraisal request table (Evidence No. 187, 189, 191, 191, 208, 209, 371), each gene appraisal report (Evidence No. 190, 350, 351, and 361 of the Evidence List), analysis of the screen of the motion picture at the scene of the crime (Evidence No. 370);

1. Reporting on the analysis of crimes against the suspect of murder after apartment fire prevention, notification on the results of clinical psychological evaluation, Dong situation register, and notification on the results of mental appraisal;

1. 내사보고(피의자 임의동행하지 못한 부분에 대한), 내사보고(112신고 내용 확인 및 내역 첨부 - 첨부 신고내용 정리자료, 112신고사건처리표 포함), 수사보고[피해자조사 등 - 첨부 상해부위 사진(피해자 AA) 포함], 내사보고(현장CCTV영상자료 첨부 - 첨부 CCTV영상 캡처사진 포함), 내사보고(피의자 범행영상 추가 첨부 - 첨부 CCTV영상 캡처사진 포함), 내사보고(피해자 발견 장소 - 첨부 1층 약도 및 2층 약도 포함), 내사보고(피해자 L 피해내역에 대한 - 첨부 응급실기록 및 간호기록 등 포함), 수사보고(압수품을 촬영한 사진), 수사보고(피의자가 범행도구인 휘발유를 구입하는 CCTV영상 첨부 - 첨부 CCTV영상 캡처사진 포함), 수사보고(피의자에게 휘발유를 판매한 직원 진술), 수사보고(BV 병원 후송 피해자 수사), 수사보고(피해자 조사결과), 수사보고(D아파트 E동 F호 현관 출입문 상단에 설치된 CCTV - 첨부 사설 CCTV 촬영사진 포함), 수사보고(E동 F호에 설치된 CCTV영상에 대한 - 첨부 사설 CCTV영상 캡처사진 포함), 수사보고(휘발유 구입에 대한 수사), 수사보고(피해자 Z 현재 상태에 대한 수사), 수사보고(피해자 W, BP, AY에 대하여), 수사보고(피해자 BA, BB 전화진술), 수사보고(칼 구입장소에 대한 수사 - 첨부 칼 구입장소 촬영사진 포함), 수사보고(BW호 입주자 전화 진술에 대한), 수사보고(E동 1층 ~ 3층 입주민 상대수사), 수사보고(D아파트 살인 등 입주민 E동 4~5층), D 아파트 8층 탐문결과, 수사보고(AA의 진술에 대한 수사), 수사보고(범행당일 전체적인 CCTV영상 시간 순 정리에 대한 - 첨부 CCTV영상 캡처사진 포함), 수사보고(외부를 촬영하고 있는 CCTV영상 첨부에 대한), 수사보고(내부를 촬영하고 있는 CCTV영상 첨부에 대한), 수사보고(피해자 BI 소견서 및 통원확인서 첨부 - 첨부 소견서, 통원확인서 포함), 수사보고(피해자별 피해시간 및 피해장소에 대한), 수사보고(피의자 이동경로에 대한), 수사보고(D아파트 E동 전 세대 전수조사), 수사보고(보호관찰자료 첨부 - 첨부 보호관찰자료 포함), 수사보고(피의자 굴삭기운전기능사 자격증 취득 관련 확인 사항), E동 H호, F호 민원접수 및 조치내용(증거목록 순번 218), 피해자 고 K(J호 거주)관련 진술 확인(증거목록 순번 219), 수사보고(본건 아파트 관리사무소장 등 진술요지), 수사보고(피의자 BX 고등학교 생활기록부 등 첨부 - 첨부 생활기록부 포함), 수사보고(피의자가 휘발유를 구입한 ①0주유소 및 인근주유소 거리 - 첨부 인터넷 길찾기 출력물 포함), 피의자 칼 구입관련 탐문 결과(증거목록 순번 265), 수사보고(피의자 관련 112신고 녹음파일 첨부 - 첨부 112신고사건 처리내역서 포함), 수사보고(피의자 2019. 3. 13. 편의점 이용 CCTV 첨부), 수사보고(범행 전 피의자대면 경찰관 진술서 첨부 - 첨부 각 진술서 포함, 증거목록 순번 300 내지 315), 수사보고(피의자 주거지 압수수색영장 집행 결과 보고 - 첨부 압수물 사진 포함), 수사보고(피의자 칼구입 관련 인터넷 접속 위치 자료 - 첨부 인터넷접속기록 출력물 포함), 수사보고(피해자 BJ 전화진술 청취), 수사보고(2019. 4. 16. 21:41경 이후 행적 수사), 수사보고(피의자의 범행 전 동선 확인 - 첨부 피의자의 행적도 포함), 수사보고(추가증거 확보관련 - 첨부 추가증거 사진 포함), 수사보고(피의자 칼구입 날짜 관련 CCTV 확인 보고 - 첨부 CCTV영상 캡처사진 포함)

"2019 Gohap154"

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement made to AF, AG, and AE;

1. Assault photographs;

1. Investigation report (on-site appointment, etc.);

"2019, 155"

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Records of seizure and the list of seizure;

1. Each police statement of the AK, AJ, and AL;

1. On-site photographs;

Application of Statutes

1. Article applicable to criminal facts;

Article 250(1) of each Criminal Code (the point of homicide), Articles 254 and 250(1) of each Criminal Code (the point of attempted murder), Article 250(1) of each Criminal Code

Article 164(2) main text and Article 164(2)(1) of the Criminal Act; Articles 258-2(1) and 257(1) of the Criminal Act; Article 366 of the Criminal Act; Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act; Articles 261 and 260(1) of the Criminal Act; Articles 260(1) of the Criminal Act; Articles 261 and 260(1) of the Criminal Act

1. Commercial competition;

Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act (the punishment prescribed for the crime of bodily injury resulting from fire to each present building, the punishment between crimes of bodily injury resulting from fire to each present building, and punishment for the crime of bodily injury resulting from fire to the present building BK

1. Selection of punishment;

○ Crimes of homicide and homicide: Selection of death penalty

○ Crimes of causing bodily injury or injury to the present building: Imprisonment;

○ Crimes of causing property damage, assault, or special assault: Imprisonment with prison labor;

1. Punishment of concurrent crimes;

Article 37 (former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 1, and Article 50 (Punishment as death penalty for murdering a victim S with the largest punishment, and no other punishment shall be imposed) of the Criminal Act

1. Confiscation;

Article 48 (1) 1 of the Criminal Act

Parts of innocence

With respect to the facts constituting an offense in the judgment (Article 2-153 of the case No. 2019hap153), the prosecutor also seeks punishment by applying the crime of causing fire to the present building, in addition to the crime of causing fire to the present building. However, inasmuch as the crime of causing the injury to the present building is established as a result of causing the injury to the people by committing the crime of causing the present building and the present building, it is reasonable to view that the crime of causing the present building and the present building, which is the basic crime, is not established separately. As such, among the facts charged in the instant case, the facts constituting the crime of causing the present building and the present building are not a crime, and thus, the charge of causing the present building and the present building are not guilty pursuant to the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act, but

Judgment on Defendant and Defense Counsel’s argument

1. Summary of the assertion

The defendant and his defense counsel asserts to the effect that the defendant was in a state of mental disability due to the injury or illness at the time of the crime of this case.

2. Determination

A mental disorder prescribed in Article 10 of the Criminal Act requires that mental disorder, such as mental illness or abnormal mental state, other than mental disorder, is deemed to lack or decrease in the ability to discern things or control action accordingly due to such mental disorder. Therefore, even if a person with a mental disorder is a person with a normal mental disorder at the time of committing a crime, such mental disorder cannot be deemed a mental disorder if he/she had the ability to discern things and control action (see Supreme Court Decision 2012Do12689, Jan. 24, 2013).

According to the above evidence, it is recognized that the defendant has a mental disorder of the on-site illness of the defendant, and due to that, it shows the damage network, the relation, and unstable sentiment.

However, in full view of all the circumstances, such as the background, means and method of the instant crime, and the Defendant’s act before and after the instant crime, it cannot be seen that the instant crime was committed in a state where the Defendant lacks the ability to discern things or make decisions at the time of the instant crime. Therefore, the foregoing assertion is rejected.

Reasons for sentencing

1. Scope of punishment by law: Penalty of death;

2. Scope of the recommended punishment according to the sentencing criteria (the crime of murder and attempted murder at the time of sale);

[Determination of Type 5] Type 5

[Special Aggravation] Aggravations: planned murder crimes, victims who are vulnerable to the crimes, and cruel methods of committing crimes.

[Scope of Recommendation] Special Heavy Region: Weapons or more;

3. Determination of sentencing

A. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court, the following facts and circumstances are acknowledged.

1) Defendant’s age, family relation, environment, occupation and experience, personality and conduct, intelligence, education level, Defendant was born in the region of Jinju to the south of the fourth in the region of Jinju, and his family members did not have a big interest. At an elementary school, fighting between parents was frequent, her mother-child was going out, and the attached was killed in the region of Jinju. Since the Defendant was born, the Defendant continued to live in the region of Jinju. Since he was born. Since then, the Defendant was born, the Defendant was infinite, which was the subordinate right to enter the middle school, but it was difficult to form a family, and was sexually poor, and was abandoned to enter the high school.

After completing military service as public interest service personnel, the Defendant transferred a number of workplaces, such as a vehicle maintenance plant, manufacturing plant, etc. Around 2008, the Defendant: (a) was engaged in assembly work at the laundry laundry Station located in Changwon; (b) did not have been covered by industrial accident insurance, but did not have been covered by industrial accident; (c) the Defendant, in order to obtain the recognition of industrial accident, sent to the position of industrial accident recognition, such as visiting relevant agencies; (d) began to live in the house where he was living together with a mother and friendly relationship; and (e) the Defendant was thought that a company-related person was suffering from damage, such as interfering with a surveillance and personal relationship, and accordingly, his family members were also destroyed.

On May 2010, the Defendant was sentenced to two years of imprisonment, three years of suspended execution, and three years of probation due to the crime of violation of the Punishment of Violence, etc. Act (a collective, deadly weapons, etc.) at the Changwon District Court on August 31, 2010, and the Defendant stated that the Defendant was at an early interview at the probation office, and that he was at a disadvantage to his family. The Defendant was punished by a fine of 200,000 won on May 23, 1998, except for the above case and the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of 200,000 won due to the violation of the Road Traffic Act.

The Defendant was put on probation for three years after having been sentenced to the foregoing judgment. Around January 201, the Defendant was forced to be hospitalized at the CA hospital as a early illness on and around October 201, and the Defendant was released from the hospital on or around October 2011. Around August 2012, the Defendant: (a) obtained a digging-out license; (b) intended to assist sckes articles at the construction site; (c) went beyond the road on or around July 2013; (d) was sckes, and (e) went beyond the road, and became unable to engage in a new work due to a recurrence. Meanwhile, on March 11, 2012, the Defendant was admitted to the BX High School affiliated with the CB High School and graduated from the school on February 14, 2015; (c) according to the daily record, the Defendant was judged to have been subject to a new probation of 110 students, as a substitute, scambling, and liability for the Defendant.

Until July 2016, the Defendant got outpatient medical treatment under the CC mental hospital’s diagnosis, and caused a drug prescribed by the hospital, which led to the loss of body, and the Defendant’s complaint that the person complaining of the disadvantage is the neutian, and suspended the neutic treatment.

The Defendant’s intelligent index is somewhat short of the average level of 78-88. At the time of the instant crime, the Defendant was economically lacking and did not have a certain occupation.

2) Relationship with victims

From around 2017, the Defendant moved into a D apartment located in the place where the instant crime was committed, and resided in the same household. Most victims are neighboring residents living in the apartment E-dong where the Defendant was living in the place where the Defendant was living. The Defendant thought that the said victims were bullying, brut, and bruting the Defendant by joining the group in which the Defendant was bullying, and in particular, the victims thought that the victims of Fhos were leading, and were brut before the house by spreading garbage or leading the victims. The victims of Mhos are the Defendant’s relative-friendly family, and the Defendant thought that the victims of Ehos were frut against the Defendant. The victims of Jhos thought that the victims had a good appraisal on the ground that the victim was fhosh and was frighting, and that the CCTV installed in the apartment house was installed as a neighbor, and that there was also an attack between the residents and the residents.

3) From July 2016, the Defendant, such as the motive and circumstance leading up to the commission of the crime, was unable to contact with the Defendant on the following grounds: (a) from around July 2016, the Defendant was in suspension of the treatment of the injury and illness; (b) his family members, whether he was infected, or his mother was on board a door-to-face, and (c) his family members did not provide the Defendant with mental and economic support.

At AD Center around January 17, 2019, the Defendant: (a) was released when the employee working at the said Center asked the Defendant to shot coffee; (b) was arrested as a flagrant offender under the suspicion of assault that he was committing the said employee’s satisfy and other employees, etc.; and (c) on March 10, 2019, the Defendant was released from the charge of assaulting and threatening with the owner of the head office and his customers before Jinju-si Fypt; and (d) was arrested as a flagrant offender under the suspicion of property damage and damage (the instant case), and was arrested as a flagrant offender under the charge of assaulting and threatening with the owner of the head office and his customers (the instant case), even though the Defendant’s fysat became aware of how the Defendant’s fysat was hospitalized into the Defendant on his own face, the method of hospitalization was not found; and (b) the Defendant’s fys did not find the method of hospitalization.

On or around March 12, 2019, the Defendant expressed an decentralization, such as spreading garbage on the front door of the front door of the apartment E-dong, in front of the apartment E-dong E-dong, where he thought that he was rashing the Defendant of the ordinary book (the part on the property damage in the case of 2019Gohap153);

(iv) the preparation for, and the means and methods of, crimes;

Around March 17, 2019, the Defendant purchased a total of four knife, including a knife used for the instant crime on April 17, 2019. The Defendant saw that there was a group detrimental to himself/herself, and she was at the seat of a knife with a knife or knife with a knife and knife with a knife. On April 17, 2019, the Defendant purchased gasoline at the gas station.

On April 17, 2019, at around 04:25, the Defendant committed the instant crime against the victims who evacuated in the state of secret, such as knife knife and knife knife knife knife knife and knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife and knife knife knife knife knife knife.

5) Results of crime

The victims due to the instant crime are 28 victims. Among them, five victims were killed due to the instant crime committed on April 17, 2019, and 17 victims, including four attempted murder, were injured. The victims of murder and attempted murder were all victims vulnerable to the instant crime, such as women or the elderly and the elderly, and in particular, victims of 12 years of age and 19 years of age were included among the victims who died. Due to the instant crime, not only the victims but also the victims, their bereaved family members, and witnesses of the instant case were suffering from mental and physical pain up to the present time. The Defendant’s life and health was infringed due to the instant crime, but also the victims and their family members were deprived.

In the instant case, the victims who have lost their lives and their bereaved families were suffering from salvous pains. Moreover, despite treatment, the victims of attempted murder or special injuries suffered physical pains, such as permanent sexual paralysis, neute disorder, the left-hand side paralysis, and the pains of the cause unknown, and suffering from mental stress disorder, depression, depression, anti-human challenge, and depression, and are not properly engaged in daily life.The victims who suffered from a smoke, etc. were also suffering from severe mental impulses.

6) The circumstances after crimes

The Defendant resisted with the police officers and the family members of the instant case after the occurrence of the instant crime, and arrested the police officers to cope with the instant crime by shots, etc. In response to the instant crime. While the Defendant acknowledged the instant crime from the investigative agency to the instant court, the Defendant did not appear to have committed a serious anti-defensive or ex post facto meeting on the instant case, and repeated only the Defendant’s assertion that there was a significant disadvantage that the Defendant had suffered, and that the investigation on the said part was not conducted at all. The Defendant did not make any effort to injure the suffering of the victims and their family members or to recover damage.

7) Possibility of reoffending

According to the notice of the results of the clinical Review on the Defendant, the Defendant’s evaluation of the PC-R’s selection of the mentally ill person (PCL-R) constitutes an intermediate risk group with a total of 18 points, and constitutes a total of 19 points as a result of the KSAS-G evaluation of recidivism risk. According to the notice of the result of the Defendant’s mental assessment, if the Defendant’s treatment is not given, there is a risk of recidivism.

(b) Determination of sentence: Death penalty;

1) Relevant legal principles

Considering the fact that the death penalty is a very cold punishment that deprives of human life and that it is extremely exceptional punishment that can be presented by the judicial system, the sentence of death penalty should be allowed only when there are special circumstances that a person can be deemed justifiable in light of the degree of responsibility for the crime and the purpose of the punishment. Therefore, in determining whether to impose the death penalty, the death penalty can be determined by thoroughly examining all the matters that constitute the conditions for sentencing, including the offender’s age, occupation and experience, character and behavior, character, intelligence, education degree, growth process, family relation, relationship with the victim, motive for the crime, preparation, degree of preparation, means and method, degree of cruel and badness, degree of consequence, victim’s gravity and appraisal, the depth and attitude after the crime, the degree of damage recovery, and fear of recidivism, etc., with the focus on the matters provided in Article 51 of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 201Do2198, Feb. 19, 2016).

2) Determination

According to the mental appraisal results against the defendant, it appears that there was an abnormal disorder on the part of the defendant. This is also the reason why the background and motive of the crime of this case was far away from ordinary people. The defendant was under probation and treatment for seven years after the crime committed on the part of the past due to a dynamic disorder, and was engaged in daily life, such as obtaining a certificate of qualification or faithfully attending BX high school. However, the defendant voluntarily suspended the treatment of her on-site and prevented the act of killing after having committed several acts of violence. Examining the circumstances in this case, the defendant did not seem to have been able to prevent such a gap, and it was hard to find out that it was hard to say that there was no reason to reduce the responsibility of the defendant with respect to this case and the defendant, who was under probation and treatment for seven years after the crime of violence committed on the part of the defendant. However, despite the fact that the defendant did not take proper measures against the patient who was suffering from violence, he cannot be said to have been under the same social responsibility as this case.

Defendant’s motive for committing a crime cannot be easily understood as an ordinary person’s common sense. Defendant planned to commit a crime in advance and prepared tools for committing a crime in order to implement the crime. It does not only commit a crime against many people’s apartment house, but also murdered with five knife with knife and knife with the victim who evacuated without mind at the victim’s own expense, and two knife two knife with the victim’s attempted murder, and two knife with the victim’s injury, and the number of crimes is very harsh. In this case, there is no possibility that the victim would not be the victim, and there is no problem of misjudgment. The current law does not introduce so-called a so-called “flife sentence that restricts the possibility of death, etc.,” and it seems that the Defendant did not have made efforts to protect the life and health of an individual, as it appears that it was hard to say that there was a high risk of death and physical harm to the victim.

Even when considering the fact that the death penalty is a very limited and exceptional punishment that can be presented by the dualistic judicial system of a literacy country, and that it is difficult to deny that the mental state of a defendant has influenced a certain part of the occurrence of a crime, considering the above circumstances, considering the following factors: (a) the balance between the various sentencing conditions and the criminal punishment against the defendant; (b) the general preventive perspective of the crime; and (c) the majority of jurors representing the sound common sense and experience of the general public who expressed their opinions on the death penalty, it is determined that the defendant should be sentenced to the maximum statutory punishment.

jury verdict and sentencing opinion;

1. A verdict on facts constituting an offense;

○ All guiltys: 9 persons (compacting)

2. Do verdict as to whether mental illness is recognized.

○ Recognition: Two persons;

○ Non-Recognition: Seven persons;

3. Opinions on sentencing

○ Death penalty: Eight persons;

In this life imprisonment: one person;

Constitution of the presiding judge

Judge Lee Jin-ok

Judges Lee Byung-ho

1) Although the sentencing guidelines have been set for other crimes, the sentencing guidelines for remaining crimes are not additionally examined as to the scope of recommending murder and attempted murder more than the death penalty or imprisonment for life. However, in determining the sentence, the sentencing guidelines should be fully taken into account the circumstances of the remaining crimes.

A person shall be appointed.