2. In light of the fact that the Defendant, who is an employee of the apartment management office, sells the victim’s right arms to the right with a deadly weapon (22.5 cm in total length, 11 cm in length) that the Defendant, who is an employee of the apartment management office, performed drinking at the office office, is a principal frighter, and that the Defendant, who is an employee of the office of the same management office, frighters the victim’s right arms at the office, which is a deadly weapon (2.5 cm in total length, 2.5 cm in length, 11 cm in length, etc.), and that the degree of the victim’s injury is very important, there is no need

On the other hand, the fact that the defendant led to confession of and reflects on the facts of the crime of this case, the fact that the defendant is deemed to have committed contingent acts under the influence of alcohol, there are no criminal records of the same kind except the punishment of fine of 200,000 won due to an injury in 191, there is no history of punishment above suspension of execution, and the fact that the injured person by agreement with the victim is in the preference of the defendant.

In addition, the lower court did not recognize that the sentence against the Defendant was too unafford, and that there was no special change in the judgment of the Defendant in light of the overall circumstances, and all other circumstances that form the conditions for sentencing as shown in the records and arguments of the instant case, including the Defendant’s age, environment, sexual conduct, motive for committing a crime, and circumstances before and after committing a crime.

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