2. The defendant is subject to restraint.

Around 2019, the victim was committed against the victim, who was sentenced to a punishment by assault, interference with business, etc., and was released from the prison, and the victim was found again to have committed the crime of this case.

In addition, around 2017, the defendant has been punished by a fine for an attempted crime of intrusion upon the victim and repeated the crime against the victim.

The above is the circumstances unfavorable to the defendant.

However, the Defendant recognized and reflected the instant crime.

The victim expressed his intention not to be punished by the defendant from the police, and again presented a written application to the court of the second instance that the defendant did not want to have any contact or access after the instant case, and that the defendant appealed against the defendant.

The above is the circumstances favorable to the defendant.

The above circumstances are as follows: (a) comprehensively taking account of the circumstances that led to the Defendant to commit the crime, the age of the Defendant, health status, character and conduct, environment, and circumstances that are conditions for sentencing as indicated in the instant case, the lower court’s punishment is too heavy or unreasonable; and (b) the Defendant and the prosecutor’s assertion are without merit.

3. In conclusion, the appeal filed by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit, and all of them are dismissed under Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.