The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant did not have any intention to kill the victim at the time of committing this part of the crime.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (three years and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) As to the assertion of mistake of facts, an intentional act in the crime of murdering or attempted murder includes the perception or prediction of the possibility or risk of causing death to another person, and dolusent negligence is acknowledged even if the perception or prediction is uncertain. Furthermore, as to whether the Defendant had committed the murder at the time of the crime, the determination should be made by taking into account the objective circumstances before and after the crime, such as the background leading up to the crime, the motive for the crime, the existence of a deadly weapon prepared, the type and method of the crime, the seriousness and repetition of the attack, the possibility of causing the death, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2006Do734, Apr. 14, 2006; 2017Do19501, Jan. 25, 2018). Based on the stated reasoning, the lower court rejected the Defendant’s assertion that the Defendant had attempted murder at the time of the crime of this case.

The following circumstances revealed by the legal principles as seen earlier and the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below. In other words, the Defendant, at the time of committing the attempted murder of this case, has followed the part of the kitchen under the victim’s chest name with the kitchen knife at the time of committing the attempted murder of this case. The kitchen knife is a dangerous object that may cause fatal harm to the human body, and the kitchen knife is up to 19cc in length and 31cc in total length, and the part of the defendant’s attack may cause serious harm to the human body.