2. The Defendant appears to have committed the instant crime in favor of the Defendant. However, the instant crime was committed in favor of the Defendant by assaulting a victim who had much more age than himself/herself at the long distance during the late time, and the crime was committed in light of the motive, circumstance, method and consequence of the crime, etc., and the Defendant agreed with the victim.

In light of the fact that there is no circumstance to deem that the defendant made a serious effort to recover the victim's damage at least, there is a history of having been sentenced to a suspended sentence of imprisonment with labor for one time as an act of violence and a fine of seven times as a fine, other than the previous one, and there is a history of having been punished several times as a previous crime. The court below appears to reflect the above favorable circumstances, and there is no change of circumstances that make it different from the above circumstances in the trial, and in full view of the defendant's age, character, character and environment, occupation and environment, occupation, power, process of the instant crime, means and consequence, circumstances before and after the instant crime, etc., the sentence of the court below is too unreasonable.

3. Accordingly, 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 groundless. It is so decided as per Disposition.