Defendant

In addition, all appeals filed by the respondent for attachment order and the prosecutor are dismissed.

The summary of the grounds for appeal is as follows: (a) the Defendant and the requester for an attachment order (hereinafter referred to as the “Defendant”) sent gasoline only to their own room, and did not spread gasoline to the victim’s room; and (b) did not know whether the victim was in a room at the time of committing the crime.

With respect to the punishment sentenced by the court below (15 years of imprisonment), the defendant asserts that it is too unreasonable for the defendant, and the prosecutor asserts that it is too uneasible and unfair.

The prosecutor asserts that it is unfair for the court below to dismiss the defendant's request for attachment order even though the defendant has the risk of repeating the crime of murder.

Judgment

As to the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts on the part of the instant case, the Defendant appeared to have entered the victim’s room while engaging in a dispute with the victim in an investigative agency, and left the victim several times by going out of the house after having left the room.

In full view of the circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, such as the fact that the Defendant stated that the Defendant was in a defense room and did not know that he was in a defense room, and that there was a lot of time for the Defendant to leave the house, and the time has not elapsed since the Defendant did not appear in the house (23:30 around) and the time of the crime, it can be sufficiently recognized that the Defendant went out of the crime of this case while recognizing that the Defendant was in a defense.

B. In full view of the facts inquiry by the court of the original instance, the National Scientific Investigation Agency of the Supreme Prosecutors' Office, each reply by the Supreme Prosecutors' Office, and the witness G of the original trial, the defendant's assertion is not acceptable since the defendant can sufficiently recognize the fact that the victim kills the victim at the time of committing the crime.

It is the fact that the bereaved family members of the victim's judgment on the illegal claim for sentencing are the preference of the defendant, and the crime of killing the victim is recognized.