The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The Defendant explicitly withdrawn misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles on the first trial date at this Court’s trial date.

In full view of the sentencing conditions indicated in the records and arguments of this case, the crime of this case was committed by the defendant who kills the victim in a discriminatory manner by using the 74 years old tree, and the nature of the crime is very bad, and the victim has lost his life due to the crime of this case, and the victim's mental suffering seems to be very high, it cannot be said that the court below's punishment is excessively excessive and beyond the reasonable scope of discretion, even if it is favorable to the defendant, given that there were no particular criminal records for about 21 years after the defendant was sentenced to a fine in the past two times, and that there was no specific criminal records for about 21 years since the defendant was sentenced to a fine in the past, and that the defendant is expected to cause contingent crimes by dispute with the victim.

The defendant's assertion that the sentencing of the court below is unreasonable is not accepted.

2. The appeal by the defendant is dismissed on the ground of the lack of reason. According to the records, the seven-dimensional part of the judgment of the court below stating that "the defendant has no particular criminal history except that sentenced to a fine three times due to a violation of the Road Traffic Act, etc." is obvious that a mistake of the victim's criminal records is made. Thus, the deletion of the appeal by its authority pursuant to Article 25 (1) of