2. In light of the above, there are favorable circumstances such as: (a) the defendant recognized the instant crime and divided his mistake; (b) the degree of injury to the victim caused by the instant crime is relatively minor; (c) the victim does not want the punishment of the defendant by mutual consent with the victim; and (d) the defendant has no criminal record.

However, the crime of this case was committed by the defendant by discovering the victim who was in a knife, threatening the victim on the part of the victim's knife. The knife's knife knife knife knife knife the victim's arms that prevent the victim from knife with the knife, and the crime was extremely poor in light of the motive of the crime and the form of the act, etc., and the defendant has a history of criminal punishment for violent crimes several times, and the defendant again commits the crime of this case without violating the period of suspension of execution.

In addition, considering the above favorable circumstances, the lower court sentenced a sentence that is lower than the statutory punishment for special injury after mitigation of punishment, and considering the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, means and consequence of the instant crime, and all of the sentencing conditions indicated in the records and changes theory, such as the circumstances after the crime, it does not seem that the sentence imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

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