2. The crime of this case was committed on the part of the Defendant, a dangerous article, with metal scrap and drinking, thereby causing injury to the victim’s head. It is disadvantageous that the crime of this case was committed in light of the risk of criminal methods, such as the tool of the crime, the part of violence, etc., was committed.

However, in light of the favorable circumstances such as the fact that the defendant's mistake is against the defendant, there is no domestic criminal record, that the victim does not want to punish the defendant, that the victim's injury is relatively minor, that the defendant (the Chinese person) and the victim (the victim is a Chinese person) are foreign workers working in the same factory, and have been under conflict because it is not easy to communicate with each other, it seems that the defendant was committed in the crime of this case by hearing the statement that the victim left the automatic contact device used by his own denial and contingently, there are some circumstances to take into account the situation, such as the fact that the defendant's business owner is able to pay more attention to the adaptation of the domestic life of foreign workers in the future, and other favorable circumstances such as the defendant's age, sex, sex, environment, family relations, circumstances after the crime, etc., it cannot be deemed that the punishment of the court below is too unfair.

The ground for appeal is without merit.

3. The appeal by the public prosecutor on the conclusion of the judgment is without merit and is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.