The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant did not intend to kill the victim.

B. The lower court’s sentencing (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination on the grounds for appeal

A. (i) As to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts, the intention of murder in the relevant legal doctrine is not necessarily deemed to have the intention of murdering or to have planned murder. It is sufficient to recognize or have predicted the possibility or risk of causing death of another person due to one’s own act, and its recognition or prediction is not only conclusive but also conclusive. In a case where the defendant argues that there was no criminal intent of murder at the time of committing the crime, and that there was only the criminal intent of murder or assault, the issue of whether the defendant was guilty of murder at the time of committing the crime should be determined by comprehensively taking into account the objective circumstances before and after committing the crime, such as the background leading up to the crime, motive, motive, existence and type of the crime, method of attack, degree of repetition and repetition of the prepared deadly weapons, and possibility of occurrence of the result of death.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Do9867, Feb. 26, 2009). In full view of the following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, it may be recognized that the Defendant had an intention to commit murder, as it may be found that the Defendant had an intention to commit murder. Therefore, the above assertion by the Defendant is without merit.

① On November 9, 2013, at around 11:40, the Defendant: (a) sent a male-friendly arrest victim at C as of November 1, 2013 due to mobile phone price opened in the name of the Defendant; and (b) moved the victim to the lower lower level of the underground lane than the passenger-friendly arrester located in the old Don Eup.

While the Defendant was in a dispute with the victim in the above vehicle, the Defendant said that the victim would not have any longer dialogue, and that vehicle is getting off from the vehicle.