The judgment below

The part of the defendant's case shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for seven years.

A seized knife knife.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence of imprisonment (six years of imprisonment) imposed by the lower court against the Defendant and the person against whom the attachment order was requested (hereinafter “Defendant”) is too unreasonable.

B. A prosecutor 1) According to the misapprehension of the legal principle (a case involving attachment order) and a written investigation before the request, etc., despite the high risk that the Defendant again commits murder, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine that it is difficult to readily conclude that the Defendant is in danger of re-influence of murdering, solely on the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. In light of the records, a thorough examination of the evidence of this case as to the prosecutor's assertion of misunderstanding the legal principles, the court below's decision that it is difficult to readily conclude that the defendant is in danger of recommitting murder only with the evidence submitted by the prosecutor is just, and therefore, there is no error of law by misunderstanding the legal principles as indicated by the prosecutor

Therefore, this part of the prosecutor's argument is without merit.

B. It is recognized that the crime of attempted murder of this case committed by the Defendant and the prosecutor on the assertion of unfair sentencing by the Defendant and the prosecutor appears to have been committed by the Defendant during the dispute with the victim, and that the victim of the crime of injury of this case did not want the punishment against the Defendant, and that the Defendant’s mistake is divided and reflected.

However, the crime of attempted murder of this case is committed by attempted to murder with knife under the right wn, such as the left side knife and the right side knife, which the Defendant had previously possessed on the ground that he would refuse the Defendant’s demand that the victim would borrow money. The crime of the bodily injury of this case is committed by the wife.