2. It is recognized that the instant crime was committed on July 1, 2014 that the Defendant committed the instant crime, without any justifiable reason, and committed assault and bodily injury to the victims, and that the Defendant was punished several times as a previous violent crime, and that the Defendant was sentenced to six months of imprisonment with prison labor on July 1, 2014, and committed the instant crime even if he was under repeated period after the execution of punishment was completed on November 22, 2014, and even when he was under repeated period on November 22, 2014, and did not submit any particular data on the recovery of victims’ damage until the trial of the victims.

However, considering the following facts: (a) the Defendant recognized his mistake and reflects, and the Defendant’s mental illness appears to have an effect on the occurrence of the instant crime; and (b) there is no special circumstance or change that may be newly considered in sentencing after the sentence of the lower judgment; (c) the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive and background of the instant crime, means and method of the crime; and (d) the circumstances that form the conditions for sentencing specified in the argument and the record of the instant case, such as the circumstances after the sentence of the lower judgment, the sentence imposed by the lower court is too uneasible and unreasonable.

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