The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact-finding, the excessive amount that the defendant gets beyond the victim and was cited by the correct hand is in contact with the victim's side fiff, and the victim was not intentionally fiffed.

B. The Defendant, by misapprehending the legal doctrine, only carried excessive and sacrificing the victim, and the victim tried to report to the police to the police, so that the victim sacrifeded twice into each item, and tried to threaten the victim.

The top side of the victim's left-hand side is about 3 cm depth of about 3 cm, which can be recovered from a single felling operation, and the upper part of each item requires stability fees for about 14 days.

The defendant did not have the intention of murder.

C. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (five years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) Determination of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles on the assertion of homicide does not necessarily require the intention of murdering or planned murdering. It is sufficient to recognize or anticipate the possibility or risk of causing death of another person due to one’s own act, and its recognition or prediction is not only conclusive but also conclusive. In a case where the defendant contests that there was no criminal intent of murder at the time of committing the crime, and only the scope of injury or assault was limited to that of murder at the time of committing the crime, the issue of whether the defendant was guilty of murder shall be determined by taking into account the objective circumstances before and after committing the crime, such as the background leading up to the crime, motive, type, and method of the crime, the existence and repetition of the prepared deadly weapons, the degree of the likelihood of causing the death (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2006Do734, Apr. 14, 206; 2006Do7386, Feb. 26, 2009).