Defendant

In addition, all appeals filed by the person who requested the attachment order and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The lower court’s sentence (four years of imprisonment) against the Defendant and the person who requested to attach an attachment order (hereinafter “Defendant”) is too unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor 1) The lower court’s sentence on the case of the Defendant’s improper sentencing on the Defendant’s case is too uneasible.

2) The lower court’s dismissal of the Defendant’s request for an attachment order, despite the recognition of the risk of recidivism of murdering crimes, with respect to the case claiming an attachment order.

2. Determination

A. The circumstances favorable to the defendant include the fact that the defendant alleged unfair sentencing for the defendant's case recognized his crime and against himself, and that the victim complained of the defendant's prior action by agreement with the victim, etc.

However, the crime of this case is one of the attempted attempts to murder the victim six times in knife with the victim who wants not to keep the defendant in mind, and the crime of this case is bad in light of the motive and circumstance of the crime and the degree of damage.

Although the Defendant had been sentenced to suspended sentence due to the attempted murder, the Defendant committed the same offense as the instant case.

These points are disadvantageous to the defendant.

In addition, considering all of the sentencing conditions shown in the arguments, such as the defendant's age, sex, environment, means and result of the crime, conditions before and after the crime, and the scope of the recommended punishment according to the sentencing guidelines of the Supreme Court sentencing committee, the sentence of the court below is too unreasonable or too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant and the prosecutor's argument of sentencing is without merit.

B. 1) The lower court deemed that the Defendant is likely to repeat the crime of murdering.

did not recognize it.

The reasons are as follows.

(1) The results of the examination of a mentally ill person’s selective test (PCL-R) are as follows: 14 points in total, the risk of re-offending is merely equivalent to the level of “interim” (in Korea, it is in accordance with PC-R).