The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four years.

excessive one sheet (No. 1) seized shall be confiscated.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. (1) Defendant 1 was in a state of mental and physical disability by drinking alcohol under a state of non-explosion at the time of committing the instant crime against the victim.

Dob. The sentencing of the lower court (three years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The lower court’s sentencing is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the record of the judgment on the claim of mental retardation, it is not deemed that the defendant was in a state of weak ability to discern things or make decisions due to the above crime in light of the circumstances leading to the crime, the means and method of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., even though the defendant was in a state of drinking alcohol at the time of the crime in this case, even though he was found to have been in a state of drinking alcohol. Thus, the above argument by the defendant is without merit.

B. According to the record of the judgment on the assertion of unfair sentencing, the defendant has been suffering from mental diagnosis and treatment due to influence, etc., and he was unable to do so on the day of the crime in this case, resulting in the crime in this case by drinking alcohol and stress caused by noise between floors, which resulted in no criminal record exceeding the fine for the last ten years, the defendant has been subject to a confession of the crime in this case, and the defendant's wife is against himself, and the defendant's wife deposited five million won for the victim in the court below, and additionally deposited two million won in the court below.

However, the crime of this case is about the attempted attempt of murdering a victim, who is a neighboring resident, with a deadly weapon for inter-floor noise, and the defendant has been prepared in advance and used beyond knife and has reached knife with the depth of the upper part of 10cc and reached knife (at the same time, at one knife is presumed to be be bef in the process of leaving knife after knife), and the defendant has a knife direction.