2. The Defendant, on the ground that the victim, who was in an internal-related relationship, made an injury by assaulting the victim on the ground that the victim had made the speech that he was drinking, is the only drinking, is the circumstances unfavorable to the Defendant. In light of the motive and content of the crime, frequency of the crime, etc., the poor quality of the crime was committed, and the fact that the victim appears to have exercised

However, in full view of the following factors: (a) the Defendant’s recognition of all of the instant crimes and reflects the fact that there is no particular criminal history except for those punished once by a fine due to a violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents in 2001; (b) the degree of injury inflicted by the victim was not excessive; (c) the victim and the family members of the Defendant agreed upon the victim and the Defendant’s wife at the investigation stage; (d) the victim and the Defendant’s family members want to have the Defendant’s wife; (e) there is no circumstances or circumstances that may be newly considered in sentencing after the decision of the lower court was rendered; and (e) other factors of sentencing as indicated in the Defendant’s age, sexual behavior, family environment, motive and circumstance of the crime, means and consequence of the crime; and (e) the circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment cannot be deemed to be unfair,

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