The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for five years.

One knife (No. 1) for seized kitchen.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. (1) In the part of the defendant's case, although the defendant did not have intention to kill the victim at the time of the crime of this case, the court below accepted the facts charged and convicted the defendant. The judgment of the court below is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts, which affected the conclusion

(2) Under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the crime, the Defendant was in a state that the Defendant lacks the ability to discern things or make decisions.

(3) The sentence of imprisonment (six years of imprisonment) imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.

B. It is unreasonable for the lower court to order the Defendant to attach an electronic tracking device, even though it is not recognized that the Defendant is not likely to repeat murdering crimes.

2. Determination on the part of the defendant's case

A. As to the Defendant’s assertion of misunderstanding the facts, the intent of murder does not necessarily require the intention of murder or planned murder, but it is sufficient to recognize or have predicted the possibility or risk of causing death of another person due to his own act, and its recognition or predictability is not definite, but it is so-called willful negligence. In a case where the Defendant asserts that there was no criminal intent of murder at the time of the commission of the crime, and only there was only the criminal intent of murder or assault, the issue of whether the Defendant was guilty of murder shall be determined by taking into account the objective circumstances before and after the commission of the crime, such as the background leading up to the commission of the crime, motive, type and method of the crime, the seriousness and repetition of the prepared deadly weapons, the degree of the likelihood of causing death, etc.

(See Supreme Court Decisions 2001Do6425 Decided February 8, 2002; 2006Do734 Decided April 14, 2006, etc.). The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly examined and adopted by the lower court, i.e., the following: