2. The instant crime committed by the Defendant, on the ground that the Defendant was frightened for the victim, who was frightened after the mouth, and the victim expressed an desire to do so in the form of a mixed-level, was inflicted on several occasions on the victim by drinking, gasing, shot pipes, etc., and the nature and circumstances of the relevant crime are not less exceptionally and criminal facts, but the victim did not suffer considerable damage, such as the victim’s retirement from a frighten surgery due to the instant injury, etc., but did not reach an agreement with the victim.

However, in full view of the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant recognized the instant crime as a primary offender without previous conviction and seriously reflects the Defendant’s mistake; (b) the Defendant paid the victim the hospital expenses, and deposited KRW 5,000,000 for the victim in the trial; and (c) the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, and circumstances after the commission of the instant crime; and (d) the Defendant’s punishment imposed by the lower court is deemed unreasonable because it is too uneasible. 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 since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

(However, in accordance with Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure, the second two pages of the judgment of the court below shall be corrected to “2010.”