2. The reason and circumstances for which the Defendant and the victim wraped are different from each other, so it is not clear to whomever the cause of fighting exists.

However, according to the images of the victim's statement and investigation report (CCTV image reading), although the Defendant and the victim were wraped on an equal basis with each other, and requested reconciliation, the Defendant unilaterally sought the victim by booming the victim's hand, and even if the victim had already been written and lost his ability to resist, it is recognized that the head of the victim was taken out or was able to resist, and that the victim suffered serious injury.

Nevertheless, the defendant repeats his argument that there is a cause of fighting and attempts to reduce his responsibility, and does not show the true fact that the defendant does not reflect his responsibility or endeavor to recover damage.

Therefore, when determining that there exists a need for the correction of the Defendant at the correction agency for a certain period, and comprehensively considering various conditions of sentencing as shown in the instant pleadings, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, and environment, the lower court’s sentencing does not seem to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion, and there is no change in the sentencing conditions that can be deemed unfair to maintain the lower court’s sentencing as it is. Therefore, the sentence of the lower court is too unreasonable.

3. In conclusion, the defendant'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.