וְסָמַךְ֙ אֶת־יָד֔וֹ עַ֖ל רֹ֣אשׁ הַֽחַטָּ֑את וְשָׁחַ֤ט אֹתָהּ֙ לְחַטָּ֔את בִּמְק֕וֹם אֲשֶׁ֥ר יִשְׁחַ֖ט אֶת־הָעֹלָֽה׃
그 속죄제 희생의 머리에 안수하고 번제 희생을 잡는 곳에서 잡아 속죄제를 삼을 것이요
Or HaChaim
Concerning the words וסמך את ידו, that the owner- sinner has to place his weight on the sin-offering prior to its being slaughtered, something that I would have derived from the same rule pertaining to the she-goat sin-offering, Torat Kohanim uses the superfluous words as applying to sin-offerings by a Nazirite or a person struck with Tzora-at after he has been declared healed. Both of these people have to bring a mandatory sin-offering at the end of the term of Nazirism or when the affliction has disappeared (compare Numbers 6,14, and Leviticus 14,11). In either instance the Torah did not mention the need for the person who obtains atonement by means of that offering to perform the rite of placing his weight on the animal. Therefore, the superfluous words וסמך ידו in our verse are used as applicable to those sin-offerings. ושחט אותה לחטאת, and he is to slaughter it to be a sin-offering. Zevachim 7 derives from these words that the act of slaughtering must be accompanied by the intent that the animal in question become a sin-offering. This is another detail which could only have been derived by the repetition of this sentence. In the previous paragraph these words were needed for the plain meaning of the verse. You may learn from this verse that this rule applies both to the sin-offering of a she-goat and that of a ewe. במקום אשר ישחט את העולה, in the place where he (the priest) is to slaughter the burnt-offering. Zevachim 48 asks: "whence do I know that the sin-offering had to be slaughtered on the northern side of the altar? Answer: Leviticus 4,33." The Talmud goes on to ask: "granted that this is true of the slaughtering; whence do I know that this is not only an initial requirement but is mandatory? Answer: "from the additional and otherwise superfluous words במקום אשר ישחט את העולה." Again we have proof that the verse had to be written in two separate paragraphs (29 and 33). The Talmud there goes on to demonstrate that this requirement applies as a mandatory requirement to all categories of sin-offerings. מדם החטאת, from the blood of the sin-offering, etc. Torat Kohanim derives from this superfluous repetition (compare verse 30) that the receiving of the blood into the receptacle provided for this was mandatory. The same kind of exegesis is used to derive halachot from every single repetition in these two paragraphs.