The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than three years and six months.

A seized knife (No. 1) shall be confiscated.

The court below dismissed the prosecutor's request for attachment order while pronounced guilty on the part of the defendant's case, and only the defendant appealed.

Therefore, the part of the judgment below regarding the claim for attachment order among the judgment below is without a benefit of appeal, and despite Article 9 (8) of the Act on the Protection and Observation of Specific Criminal Offenders and Electronic Monitoring, the part regarding the claim for attachment order among the judgment below is excluded from the scope of the judgment of this court, and the scope of the judgment of this court is limited to

The defendant is guilty of the summary of the grounds for appeal (the attempted murder) that brought a knife to the victim, and the victim is merely knife in the knife, and the knife did not cover the left part of the victim by the knife.

In other words, the defendant made a statement that he tried to get hot water from the police investigation, and the victim also made a knife in the process of having a knife with the defendant.

I stated that the operator of the restaurant in which the case occurred also the victim knife in the knife and the defendant did not pose a threat to the victim any longer.

In full view of the fact that the Defendant stated, the place of crime can be prevented for other persons, and is not suitable for the place of murder, if the Defendant intended to kill, it is more favorable to the victim in light of the size of the knife, etc., and the fact that the victim of a de facto marriage was not adequate as a motive for murder in light of the empirical rule, it is clear that the Defendant did not have the intent to kill the victim even if the Defendant did so.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found this part of the facts charged guilty is erroneous by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the judgment.

The punishment sentenced by the court below (five years of imprisonment, confiscation) is too unreasonable.

. Determination.