2. The following facts are that the degree of injury suffered by the victim is not easy, that does not reach an agreement with the victim, and that the defendant again commits the instant crime even though he/she had the record of receiving juvenile protective disposition several times, etc., which is disadvantageous to the defendant.

However, in light of the following: (a) the Defendant committed the instant crime in a somewhat contingent manner while drinking alcohol; (b) the degree of assault used by the Defendant was relatively minor; (c) the Defendant still needs to take account of the possibility of improving the Defendant’s age and the future; (d) there is no change of circumstances unfavorable to the sentencing after the sentence of the lower judgment; and (e) other factors of sentencing indicated in the instant records and pleadings, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, method of crime, circumstances after the crime, etc., and all the sentencing conditions indicated in the instant records and arguments, the lower court may determine that the sentence imposed by the

Therefore, the prosecutor's above assertion is without merit.

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