The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

The seized typble 408ll.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) In the misunderstanding of facts, Defendant 1 did not intend to kill victims by forcing victims to drink and sculpate an agrochemical beverage, etc., and did not intend to kill victims. 2) The Defendant was in a state of mental disability with mental illness, such as the state of damage, editing, etc. at the time of the instant crime.

3) The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (two years and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable and unfair.B. Prosecutor 1) In the misunderstanding of facts law scenarios, the lower court found the Defendant not guilty of the primary charges of attempted murder on November 25, 2012.

However, it should be deemed that there was a starting of the execution of the act of the victim to place the drinking water at the place where the victim might have been an opportunity to drink the drinking water. Therefore, as long as the victim requested the delivery of the drinking water to the security guards of the apartment living together, it should be deemed that the crime of murder was commenced regardless of whether the security guards received the request.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant not guilty of the attempted murder, which is the primary facts charged, on the ground that the security guard refused to receive the murder and did not reach the commencement of its execution, was erroneous in the misunderstanding of facts as to the commencement of the murder crime.

2 The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. Determination:

A. The Defendant also asserted the same purport as the grounds for appeal in this part, and the lower court rejected this part of the judgment in detail under the title “determination of the Defendant and the defense counsel’s assertion” under the title “determination of the Defendant and the defense counsel’s assertion”.

The relationship between the defendant and the victims recognized by the evidence duly adopted by the court below, and the defendant committed each of the crimes of this case.