The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Since the Defendant did not have any intention to kill the victim, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of the instant case erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the intention to murder.

B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (five years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Determination of legal principles as to the assertion of misunderstanding of legal principles does not necessarily require the intention of murder or planned murder, and it may be deemed that there was an intentional act if the Defendant knew or predicted that there was a possibility or risk of causing death of another person due to his/her own act, such as his/her assault. In cases where the Defendant did not have the intent of murder at the time of committing the crime, and only the Defendant was aware of only the intent of murder or assault, the determination should be made by taking into account the circumstances leading up to the Defendant’s commission of the crime, motive, motive, type and usage of a deadly weapon prepared at the time of committing the crime, the degree of the occurrence of the consequence of the crime, the possibility of the occurrence of the crime, the existence of the consequence of the crime, and other objective circumstances before and after the commission of the crime (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Do5355, Oct. 29, 2015).

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is just, and there is no error of law by misunderstanding legal principles as to murder as alleged by the Defendant.