The judgment below

The part of the defendant's case shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for five years.

Aknife, seized knife.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) In the course of committing the instant crime by misapprehending the legal doctrine, the Defendant and the person requesting the attachment order (hereinafter “Defendant”).

2) The Defendant cannot be deemed to have had the intent to commit murder. 2) In fact, the Defendant cannot be deemed to have committed murder. 2) In fact, there is no fact that: (a) the Defendant did not look after the victim; (b) the victim’s chest and face were not taken place by drinking; and (c) there was no fact that the victim was boomed

3) The sentence imposed by the lower court on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing (two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below is too uneasible.

2. Determination

A. 1) As to the Defendant’s assertion of misapprehension of the legal doctrine, the intention of murder is not necessarily deemed to have the intention of murdering or planned murdering. It is sufficient to recognize or anticipate the possibility or risk of the death of another person due to one’s own act, and its recognition or prediction is not only conclusive but also an uncertain intention. In a case where the Defendant asserts 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, whether the Defendant was guilty of murder or not or not should be determined by taking into account the objective circumstances before and after committing the crime (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2001Do6425, Feb. 8, 2002; 2006Do64278, Apr. 26, 2006).