2. The Court decided to jointly examine the appeal cases of the first instance judgment and the second instance judgment which sentenced the Defendant to a fine in accordance with the consolidated proceedings. If each sentence of the lower court is different from the imprisonment with prison labor and the fine, the arguments were combined in the appellate court.

Even though the appellate court can maintain each sentence sentenced by the court below, it does not necessarily require a sentence of the same kind.

Therefore, this court did not reverse the judgment of the court below ex officio on the ground of a consolidated hearing and separately determines the judgment below as follows.

3. Determination on the grounds for appeal

A. The Defendant of the first instance judgment shows the form of recognizing and reflecting the crime.

The defendant's crime seems to have suffered relatively minor damage and agreed with the victim.

On the other hand, the defendant argued with female-friendly job offers victims and destroyed the victim's house glass, which is a dangerous object, due to the lack of harmony. In light of the motive, circumstance, contents, etc. of the crime, it is not good that the crime is committed.

Defendant has been punished several times as violent crimes, and has reached the history of repeated crime in this case during the period of repeated crime.

In addition, comprehensively taking account of the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means, and consequence of the crime, and the sentencing conditions indicated in the instant case, such as the circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment is only within the reasonable scope of discretion, and it is difficult to view that it is too heavy or somewhat

Therefore, the defendant and the prosecutor's argument are not accepted.

B. The Defendant of the second instance judgment.