A. Defendant 1) In fact, the Defendant did not destroy a vehicle owned by the victim and did not inflict an injury upon the victim at the time.

2) The punishment sentenced by the lower court (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The above sentence declared by the prosecutor by the court below is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, i.e., (i) the victim consistently made a statement corresponding to each of the facts charged in this case from the investigative agency to the court of the court below; and (ii) the victim was given medical treatment to the Dacheon L Hospital on June 15, 2015 following the date on which the special crime of injury in this case occurred; and (ii) the victim was given medical treatment to the Docheon L Hospital on June 15, 2015, stating “the cause of injury” as “the other person was in contact with the other person; (iii) the content of the written diagnosis corresponds to the facts charged in this case; and (iv) taking full account of the evidence presented in the court below’s decision, it is sufficient that the defendant damaged the vehicle owned by the victim as stated in the judgment of the court below, and caused the victim to suffer cement, which is a dangerous article, and thus, caused the victim to suffer injury when hair.

B. There are circumstances favorable to the Defendant, such as the following: (a) the Defendant and the prosecutor’s argument of unfair sentencing regarding the Defendant and the prosecutor’s argument of unfair sentencing; (b) the degree of injury suffered by the victim is not much serious; (c) the repair cost of the automobile incurred by the victim is relatively small; and (d) the Defendant deposited KRW 300,000 for the victim at the time of the trial; (b) on the other hand, the Defendant did not agree with the victim; and (c