All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although the defendant's assertion (misunderstanding of facts) did not have the intention to murder, the court below found the defendant guilty of the facts charged.

B. The prosecutor’s assertion (unfair sentencing) that the court below rendered is too unfasible and unfair. The prosecutor’s assertion that the sentence of imprisonment (three years of imprisonment, four years of suspended execution, and two hundred hours of community service) is too unfas

2. Determination

A. The court below rejected the Defendant’s assertion in detail on the Defendant’s assertion of mistake as to the Defendant’s facts, based on the same assertion as the grounds for appeal in this case, and the court below, based on the following facts: “Judgment on the Defendant’s and the defense counsel’s assertion” (hereinafter “judgment on the Defendant’s and the defense counsel’s assertion”), the court below rejected the Defendant’s assertion in detail. The court below testified to the effect that the Defendant was “I knife the Defendant’s knife and knife, and I knife knife knife knife knife knife knif, and I knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knif at the court of the first instance.” In addition, the court below’s determination that the Defendant had at least

B. The lower court’s judgment on the prosecutor’s wrongful assertion of sentencing is not only favorable to the Defendant, such as (i) the victim did not have reached his multiple death and appears to have been normally engaged in daily life after completing treatment; (ii) the occurrence of the instant crime appears to have occurred somewhat contingent among the parking cost incurred by the reason of the victim’s responsibility; (iii) the victim does not want punishment against the Defendant; and (iv) the Defendant did not have any criminal history other than the home protection case at one time; and (v) the instant case.