A. Defendant 1) Defendant 1 did not inflict an injury on the victim.

2) The sentence of the lower court (an amount of KRW 5 million) that is unfair in sentencing is too unreasonable.

B. The prosecutor (unfair sentencing)’s sentence is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court in determining the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts, the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts is without merit, since it is recognized that the Defendant inflicted injury on the victim as stated in the facts charged.

B. The Defendant’s assertion of unfair sentencing by the Defendant and the Prosecutor is favorable to the Defendant, in light of the following: (a) the Defendant repaid the repair cost of KRW 2.5 million to Epidi Epis Co., Ltd.; (b) deposited KRW 1 million for the victim D; and (c) the degree of injury suffered by the victim D does not seem to be serious.

On the other hand, the crime of this case was committed by the defendant by destroying the string line of the victim Ethytho-ray to the string line, and the crime of this case was committed by the victim D with injury requiring three weeks' medical treatment in light of the victim D's clives and side scams, and the crime of this case was committed not only by the defendant, but also by the record of criminal punishment six times as violent crime, but also by the violation of the Punishment of Violence, etc. Act (joint residence intrusion) at the Jeonju District Court on January 29, 2014, and without being aware of it during the suspension period of the execution, even though he was sentenced to two years of the suspension period of the execution, and it did not reach agreement with the victim D until the trial of this case, and the victim was punished by the defendant.

In full view of the above circumstances and other factors of the instant crime, the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, and environment, etc. as well as the various sentencing conditions indicated in the instant records and arguments, the lower court’s punishment is too heavy or is deemed unreasonable.