The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of all the charges of this case, on the ground that: (a) the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine and misunderstanding of facts; (b) the Defendant did not have any intention to threaten the victim or to intrude upon the residence on September 26, 2014; (c) did not have any intention to kill the victim with a deadly weapon; and (d) did not have any intention to kill the victim; and (c) even though the Defendant did not destroy the victim’s vehicle, the lower court convicted the Defendant of all of the charges of this case, thereby misapprehending the facts or misapprehending the legal doctrine.

B. Inasmuch as the Defendant, who was physically and physically weak at the time of committing the instant murder, was under the influence of alcohol, punishment ought to be mitigated.

(c)

The punishment sentenced by the court below to the defendant (a four years of imprisonment, confiscation) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. On September 2014, a judgment of misunderstanding of facts and legal principles as to the assertion of intimidation means that a person gives notice of harm to the extent that it may cause a person to feel a threat. As such, an intentional act as a subjective constituent element does not require any intent or desire to actually realize the harm that the perpetrator knows and accepts that degree of harm and injury is threatened. However, if the perpetrator’s speech and behavior is merely an expression of simple emotional humiliation or temporary labor, and it is objectively evident that the perpetrator has no intention to make such a threat in light of the surrounding circumstances, it cannot be recognized as a intimidation or temporary labor. However, whether there was an intentional act or intent of intimidation in the above meaning should be determined by comprehensively taking into account not only the appearance of the act, but also the circumstances leading to such act, the relationship between the victim and the victim, etc. (see Supreme Court Decision 200Do534, May 10, 199).