The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

The summary of the grounds for appeal in light of the various sentencing conditions in this case, the punishment sentenced by the court below (three years and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable (the defendant, in the grounds for appeal, voluntarily surrendered by applying Article 52 of the Criminal Act, although the defendant voluntarily surrendered, the court below did not reduce the number of self-denunciation by applying Article 52 of the Criminal Act, so it alleged that the court below erred by misunderstanding the facts or misunderstanding the legal principles, but at the second trial date of the court below, the above argument was withdrawn from the above argument and dispute only on the grounds of appeal. The above misunderstanding of the facts cannot be a legitimate ground for appeal, and even after ex officio examination, there was an error of misunderstanding the facts

The defendant does not seem to have voluntarily surrendered;

Even if it is merely a mere fact that the court can voluntarily reduce the punishment against the self-denunciation, and the court below cannot be deemed illegal because it did not reduce the number of self-denunciation or did not make a decision on the assertion of mitigation of the number of self-denunciation (Supreme Court Decision 2004Do2018 Decided June 11, 2004). Examining the various sentencing conditions in the instant case, the following are the following: (a) the defendant appears to be dead and reflect on the crime in this case; (b) the defendant was assaulted by the victim; (c) the defendant seems to have been committed in a somewhat contingent and contingent manner; (d) the defendant voluntarily surrendered immediately after the crime; and (e) the victim voluntarily surrendered and by agreement with the victim, the defendant does not want the punishment of the defendant; and (e) the defendant is relatively young age of 21 years.

On the other hand, the crime of this case was committed by the defendant several times from the damaged person, and the defendant tried to kill the victim's clothes once in knife with a knife. The crime of this case is very poor in light of the contents and methods of the crime, relationship with the victim, etc., and the victim's knife.