The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two years and six months.

However, for a period of four years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

The sentence of the court below's decision (two years and six months of imprisonment, and confiscation) is too unfluent and unfair.

Defendant

The legal principles have organized the business operated for 35 years by the defendant, and the case has been lowered in a state of mental disability that has not been judged normally due to severe depression due to loss.

Nevertheless, the court below erred in the misapprehension of legal principles that did not recognize mental illness.

The sentence of unfair sentencing by the court below is too unreasonable.

Judgment

According to the records of mental and physical disabilities, it is recognized that the defendant had been missing to a certain extent after arranging the business operated by him/her, and that the defendant has been significantly interested in serious verbal or dispute with the victims at the time of committing the crime of this case.

However, in light of the circumstances leading to the instant crime and the speech and behavior before and after the instant crime, it does not seem that the Defendant lacks the ability to discern things or make decisions.

In the same purport, the judgment of the court below that rejected the claim of mental disability is just, and there is no error as alleged by the defendant.

The defendant's assertion in this part is not accepted.

As to the assertion of unfair sentencing by both parties, the Defendant, while engaging in a dispute with the victims who are family members, attempted to kill the victims by displaying a knife, etc., which is a deadly weapon, and in light of the content and the method of the crime, etc., the risk of the act is very large and not good.

It is clear that the victims suffered a serious injury, but the degree of the injury is serious, and the victims suffered a considerable mental shock due to the acts of the defendants.

Such circumstances are disadvantageous to the defendant.

On the other hand, the crime of this case is punishable by the defendant's oral dispute with the victims.

The fact that an contingent crime has been committed in a severe interest, and the defendant is late after making a confession of all the crimes.