The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The court below, within the scope of the judgment of this court, sentenced the judgment of conviction against the part of the case of this case of this court and the prosecutor’s request regarding the part of the case of the attachment order, and appealed only against the defendant. As to the part of the attachment order, there is no benefit to appeal, and therefore, notwithstanding Article 9(8) of the Act on the Protection and Observation of Specific Criminal Offenders and Electronic Monitoring, this part is excluded from the scope

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant did not intend to murder victims, misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of the legal doctrine.

Dangerous weapons used by the Defendant are difficult to be considered as a dangerous weapon to the extent that the blade length is excessive and small, which is 12 cm in length, and that it does not have been prepared in advance by the Defendant, and even considering the frequency and degree of the victims, the degree of injury of the victims is not serious, the Defendant, while recognizing the death of the victims, was acting in such manner.

It is difficult to see it.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below that recognized the defendant's intentional murder and convicted the defendant of the facts charged of this case is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts and legal principles.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (six years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

3. Determination

A. The lower court also asserted that the Defendant had the same purport as the grounds for appeal on this part, and the lower court rejected the Defendant’s assertion on the grounds as stated in the written judgment.

In light of the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below, the above judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and there is an error of law as alleged by the defendant.

subsection (b) of this section.

In particular, according to the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, the excessive use of the defendant's deadly weapons is attributable to it.