A. The sentence of the lower court (one hundred months of imprisonment, confiscation) is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. The judgment of the defendant committed the crime of this case again despite the fact that the defendant had been punished more than 20 times for violent crimes, and committed the crime of this case again due to noise problems, assaulting neighbors due to noise problems, threatening the police officers dispatched upon receipt of a report, and threatening the knife, etc., which are disadvantageous to the defendant.

However, the fact that the defendant has recognized his mistake and against himself, and the defendant has threatened with knife, but the knife is knife, and the fact that the defendant was laid down on the floor is favorable to the defendant.

In addition, considering the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, family relationship, motive and circumstance of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the Defendant and the prosecutor’s assertion are without merit, since the lower court’s punishment is too heavy or is not unreasonable because it is too heavy.

3. As such, the appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit, and all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.