2. When the crime of this case was committed with the victim H who operated the parking lot, it is recognized that Co-defendant A of the court below committed an injury in collaboration with Co-defendant A, who is in need of approximately two weeks of treatment by assaulting the victim and assaulting the victim in common with Co-Defendant A and B, and that there was a record of having been punished several times of violence, etc. in light of the circumstances of the crime, etc.

However, in full view of the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant recognized the instant crime, thereby contravening his mistake; (b) the Defendant and co-defendant appears to have committed the instant crime in a contingent manner under the influence of alcohol; (c) the degree of damage is relatively minor and an agreement has been reached with the victim; and (d) the Defendant’s age, environment, occupation, family relationship, circumstances leading to the instant crime, the degree of participation in the instant crime; and (c) the circumstances after the commission of the crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment cannot be deemed unreasonable.

Therefore, prosecutor's assertion is without merit.

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