The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, misunderstanding of the legal principles, the defendant's misunderstanding of facts is merely that the victim caused the victim's left chest on the wind that occurs on the job, and the defendant did not have an intention to kill the victim.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (a 3 years and 6 months of imprisonment, confiscation) is unfair because it is excessively unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The lower court also asserted the same purport as the grounds for appeal in this part.

The lower court, based on the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court, recognized the possibility or risk of the victim’s death by the Defendant’s act at the time of the instant crime.

Therefore, as long as the occurrence of death is permitted by committing a crime under such recognition, the Defendant had the intention of murder at least with dolus negligence, as long as the occurrence of death was allowed.

The decision was determined.

① The Defendant consistently stated in the investigative agency that “the victim’s left chest is reported and knife knife.”

It seems that the defendant did not implement a plan to write the victim's left chest from the beginning to the victim's left chest, but it seems that the defendant was aware that he laid the left chest at the time of the sludge.

2. The injured party suffered the injury that fiff f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f

If the defendant intentionally does not know about the left breast part of the defendant, the victim seems not to have been injured in depth.

(3) As the Defendant: (a) fiffed the left chest of the victim who has a heart on the road, and as a result, fiffed the victim under emergency operations; and (b) the victim did not have the possibility of death due to the instant crime.

2) Various facts and circumstances acknowledged by the lower court to determine the above deliberation.