A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

2. The judgment is against the defendant's intent to commit the crime, there is no record of criminal punishment exceeding the fine for the same crime, and the victim of the body that was the body of the defendant was committed by taking out the defendant's booming over the defendant's timber, etc., which led to this case in the process of opposing this case, the victim's injury is minor, and the fact that the victim has agreed with the victim at the investigation stage is favorable to the defendant.

The fact that the defendant commits this case during the period of repeated crime and uses dangerous articles such as garbage concentration is disadvantageous to the defendant.

In full view of the aforementioned circumstances and the motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentencing of the lower court is deemed to be too unreasonable.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is with merit, and the following judgment is rendered again

【Reasons for the Judgment of the Court which has been written] The summary of facts constituting a crime and evidence recognized by the court is identical to the description of each corresponding column of the judgment of the court below. Thus, they are cited in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act

Application of Statutes

1. Articles 258-2 (1) and 257 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

1. Article 35 of the Criminal Act among repeated crimes;

1. Determination of the sentence as ordered by taking into account the various circumstances prior to the reason for sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 ( Taking into account the favorable circumstances above) of the Criminal Act (hereinafter “Discretionary mitigation”).