2. The crime of this case is determined by the following facts: (a) the Defendant collected his hand from the victim’s inner part of the victim who was divingd at the time by the Defendant at the time; and (b) the victim’s chest was confined several times by rhing the victim’s shoulder; and (c) the victim’s negative part was committed several times; and (d) the Defendant’s unlawful punishment is more serious.

Furthermore, the Defendant did not seem to have an attitude against the truth, such as disputing part of the instant crime until the lower court.

In addition, considering the fact that the defendant does not reach an agreement with the victim so far and does not take measures to recover the damage of the victim, it is necessary to punish the defendant strictly.

However, the Defendant recognized a part of the facts from the investigative agency during the instant crime.

In addition, the Defendant was punished four times a fine for another crime without the same criminal record before committing the instant crime.

In addition, in full view of various circumstances, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, intelligence and environment, relationship with the victim, motive, means and consequence of the crime, etc., it is not recognized that the punishment determined by the lower court is too unjustifiable, and thus, it is deemed that the punishment determined by the lower court is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the prosecutor's ground of appeal cannot be accepted.

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.