The sentence of the lower court (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The following facts are unfair: (a) the Defendant recognized the instant crime; (b) the victim did not have been punished by the Defendant by solely agreement with the victim; and (c) the victim caused fighting in the instant case by first pushing the Defendant, which may be somewhat considered in the circumstances leading to the instant crime; (b) the Defendant had violent criminal records more than 30 times; and (c) the Defendant committed the instant crime without being aware of the fact that he/she was sentenced to a suspended sentence of three years in one year and six months due to interference with the execution of official duties and was under the suspended sentence of three years; and (d) the Defendant committed the instant crime without being aware of the fact that he/she was under the suspended sentence of one year and six months (the Defendant was a person who was under the suspended sentence of the said period of imprisonment and was under the termination of two times on February 21, 2019).

There is no special relationship or change of circumstances that can be newly considered in this court (it is difficult to evaluate the defendant as a special change of circumstances that could change the punishment of the court below on the sole basis of the circumstance that the defendant recognized the crime of this case in this court), and in full view of the defendant's age, sexual conduct, family relationship, circumstances after the crime, and various sentencing conditions as shown in the records and arguments of this case, such as the defendant's age, sexual conduct, family relationship, circumstances after the crime, etc.,

Defendant’s assertion is not accepted.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.