The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant was guilty of murdering on the part of the Defendant even though he did not have had the intention to kill the victim.

The judgment of the court below is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (five years of imprisonment, confiscation penalty) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination:

A. In the lower court’s determination on the assertion of mistake of facts, the Defendant alleged in the same purport as in this part of the grounds for appeal that “the Defendant did not have any intention to commit murder, despite having inflicted any knife on the victim,” and the lower court can sufficiently recognize that there was any intention to kill the victim at the time of the instant crime on the grounds of detailed circumstances under the title “determination on the Defendant and his defense counsel’s assertion” in the said judgment.

The above argument was rejected by decision.

Examining the circumstances acknowledged by the court below in comparison with the evidence duly adopted and examined at the court below, the court below’s aforementioned judgment is just and acceptable, and this part of the defendant’s assertion is without merit.

B. The fact that the Defendant’s judgment on the unfair argument of sentencing generally divided his mistake into one’s own mistake, and the victim stimulates the Defendant’s mother, etc., which led to the instant crime, such as inducing the Defendant’s desire for the Defendant’s mother, in the lower court, that the victimized party does not want the punishment against the Defendant, and that the Defendant appears to have committed the instant crime contingently in the state of interesting depending on the victim’s diversity, and that the commission of the crime led to the Defendant’s attempted crime and did not result in the result that the Defendant did not commit the crime more.

However, the crime of this case requires the defendant to have the victim knife with a knife using sof, which is a deadly weapon, with the removal of flife flife flife and flife flife flife flife.