The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment and 3 years and 6 months, confiscation) of the lower court’s sentence is too unreasonable.

2. The accused acknowledges the crime and repents the wrongness.

The defendant has been punished twice for violent crimes, but all of them have been punished for about 20 years, and except that, it has been punished for a fine for a drunk driving in 2012.

In addition, the crime of this case was committed to the attempted crime and the result of the victim’s death did not occur.

Such circumstances are favorable to the defendant.

However, the crime of this case was committed by the Defendant on the ground that the victim took a bath in the process of setting a knife and carried a knife while finding the victim again with carrying a knife while killing the victim in a non-discriminatory manner. In light of the motive and method of the crime, it is highly dangerous in light of the motive and method of the crime, and even prior to the motive of the crime or the date of the crime of this case, the Defendant carried a knife and visited the place of the crime is not good.

As a result of the instant crime, the victim suffered bodily injury, such as the core heat from the left-hand side of the 8 weeks off and the core heat from both sides, etc., which requires treatment for about 8 weeks, and the degree of injury is considerably significant as it seems necessary to conduct further surgery, such as relocation.

Nevertheless, the defendant is still not receiving a letter from the victim.

Such circumstances are disadvantageous to the defendant.

If there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect the sentencing of the first instance court as an appellate court.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). In light of the foregoing legal doctrine, the circumstances alleged by the Health Center and the Defendant as an element of sentencing were already revealed in the hearing process of the lower court, and the sentencing was made after the lower court was sentenced.