The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of the legal principle 1) The Defendant did not intend to kill the victim. Therefore, the judgment below convicting the Defendant of the facts charged of the instant case erred by misapprehending the legal principle as to the intention of murder.

2) As the Defendant voluntarily ceased to commit the instant crime, punishment should be reduced or exempted pursuant to Article 26 of the Criminal Act.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court against the Defendant (three years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. misunderstanding the legal doctrine on the intention of murder 1) The intention of murder in the relevant legal doctrine is not necessarily deemed to have the purpose of murder or the intention of planned murder, but there is a possibility or risk of causing another person’s death due to his/her act such as his/her own assault.

may be filed.

In a case where the Defendant asserted that there was no intention of murder at the time of the commission of the crime, and only was only the intent of murder or assault, the determination should be made by taking full account of the objective circumstances before and after the commission of the crime, including the background leading up to the Defendant’s commission of the crime, motive, existence and type of the crime, usage of the prepared deadly weapon, the fear and repetition of the crime, the likelihood of the occurrence of the result of the crime, the existence of the consequence of the crime, and the existence of the act of avoidance (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Do535, Oct. 29, 2015). 2) In light of the legal principles as seen earlier by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, the Defendant was aware at least of the possibility and risk of the result of the death of the victim by his own act at the time of the instant crime.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is just, and it is so decided as to the intent of murder as alleged by the Defendant.