The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for thirty years.

50,000 won shall be collected from the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The part of the case against the defendant (the defendant and the person ordered to attach the defendant and the person ordered to attach the defendant) are written with this.

(hereinafter the same shall apply)

(1) As to the misunderstanding of the facts and the misapprehension of the legal doctrine and the attempted murder (the crime No. 2 of the judgment below), Defendant did not have the intention to murder against the victims.

The defendant only committed violence to correct the same-sex behavior of the victims.

For the same reasons as stated in the facts charged, the Defendant does not have any respect for the victims.

If the defendant had had the intention to commit murder, the defendant's wife and his wife together with his wife did not commit the crime at the defendant's home where he had resided.

Even while the victims were aboard, the defendant gave meals to the victims, had the her head H reduction the roof, and had the victim I take the victim I into the hospital after committing the crime, so that the victim I could take the radiation photographing.

The defendant did not intentionally seek the head of the victim H's head, and only he was able to fit the head in the process of causing the victim H's body in order to avoid her body.

According to this, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the crime of murder and the attempted crime of murder by recognizing the intention of murder even though the defendant did not have the intention of murder, is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles,

B) In relation to the murder and attempted murder of a mental disorder, the Defendant committed the relevant crime under the state of mental and physical weakness caused by the administration of phiphonephones.

C) The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (35 years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2) Prosecutor: The sentencing of the lower court’s improper sentencing is too unhued and unreasonable.

B. It is unreasonable for the lower court to order the Defendant to attach an electronic tracking device for 20 years, even though the Defendant did not pose a risk of repeating a crime.

2. Determination as to the part of the case of the defendant