A. Although the Defendant’s assertion of factual mistake has raised little words in the process of having the alcohol and the alcohol, it did not interfere with the work due to the lack of 5 minutes of satisfing time and her bath.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous and adversely affected by the judgment.

B. In light of the fact that a person who suffered an unfair assertion in sentencing was not punished by a defendant, that the defendant committed the instant crime by drinking alcohol, and that the defendant was not found to be retaliationed, the punishment sentenced by the court below (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The lower court acknowledged the following facts based on the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, namely, D and F, an employee of the victim at the time, found the former owner and 20 minutes of the Defendant’s desire, and all customers were abandoned.

In full view of the stated facts, the Defendant interfered with the work.

full recognition may be accepted.

The defendant's assertion of mistake is without merit.

B. There are no special circumstances or changes in circumstances that may be newly considered after the decision of the court below on the unfair argument of sentencing.

It is reasonable to take into account that the injured party is not subject to the punishment of the accused, and that the accused only committed sobriing noise, but did not proceed to other acts.

However, the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable, taking account of the following factors: (a) the Defendant committed a repeated crime without having been punished more than six times, and (b) the Defendant was already punished more than six times as a crime with violent inclinations; and (c) the criminal records and arguments of this case, including the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, motive for committing the crime, etc., as well as various sentencing conditions specified in the records and arguments.

3. Thus, the defendant's appeal is correct.