In light of the fact that not only the Defendant was punished several times for the same type of crime, but also the Defendant again committed the instant crime with a person who was sentenced to a suspended sentence of imprisonment due to the crime of injury, and that there was no smooth agreement with the victim, the instant crime is not a matter that is somewhat minor.

However, the damage caused by the instant crime is relatively minor, and in particular, the Defendant is able to lead a life in good faith without recommitting a crime by putting the offense together with a punishment, reflecting the depth of the mistake.

In light of the aforementioned circumstances, the court below’s sentencing cannot be deemed too heavy or unreasonable as it goes beyond the reasonable scope of discretion, in full view of the following circumstances: (a) the background and method of the instant crime; (b) the degree of damage and the recovery of damage; (c) the motive for the crime; (d) the history of punishment; and (e) the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, career, home environment, etc.; and (e) the overall circumstances constituting the conditions for sentencing as shown in the

Therefore, the appeal filed by the defendant and the prosecutor is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.