All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) In full view of the fact-misunderstanding or misunderstanding of the legal principles that the Defendant argued with the victim, but the total of misunderstandings did not worsen to the degree that it would be difficult to make a judgment, the Defendant used the brick only for the purpose of shouldering the glass of the vehicle, did not possess a deadly weapon or other dangerous object at the time of the assault, and the Defendant did not possess a deadly weapon or other dangerous object, the Defendant was guilty

shall not be deemed to exist.

2) The Defendant, who was physically and mentally weak, was not in accordance with the usage of the medicine prescribed at the time of the instant case, was excessively recovered without complying with the usage of the medicine, and had been able to evaluate that the decentralization disorder and the polar impulse disorder, which was suffering from ordinary pain due to its influence, are equal to those with mental disorder within the original meaning. Therefore, the Defendant committed the instant crime under the state of mental and physical weakness.

must be viewed.

3) The lower court’s unfair sentencing (five years of imprisonment, confiscation) is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the Defendant’s assertion of misunderstanding of the facts or misapprehension of the legal doctrine, the lower court also asserted the same as the grounds for appeal in this part, and the lower court, taking account of the following circumstances, acknowledged that the Defendant had a criminal intent to commit murder.

The decision was determined.

① The Defendant and the victim were living together from the end of February 2018 to the beginning of February 2020, which led to frequent dispute and became final and conclusive. While the total reconciliation and ruling became difficult, the Defendant and the victim saw the Defendant.

In light of the fact that there was a symptoms that the Defendant was an obstacle to the protemination, the Defendant seems to have given considerable malicious testimony to the victim at the time of committing the instant crime.

(2) Although the defendant assaults a victim, he/she shall use a deadly weapon or dangerous object.