A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Provided, That the above punishment shall be imposed for one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

The sentence of the court below (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

Judgment

It is disadvantageous that the degree of injury suffered by the victim due to the crime of this case is not easy, and that the defendant has been punished twice as a fine for the same crime.

However, in full view of the following: (a) the Defendant led to the instant crime; (b) the Defendant made a confession of the instant crime; (c) the Defendant did not want to punish the Defendant; (d) the Defendant did not want to punish the Defendant; (c) all the sentencing conditions, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime; and (d) violent crime group, general injury, type 1 (general injury); (d) special mitigation factors (in cases where the penalty is not imposed or considerable damage is recovered); and (e) the scope of recommending sentence according to the sentencing guidelines set by the Sentencing Commission, etc., the sentence of the lower court is deemed unfair because the sentence is too excessive.

As the defendant's appeal is well-grounded, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is again decided as follows.

Criminal facts

Criminal facts against the defendant recognized by this court and summary of the evidence shall be as stated in the corresponding column of the judgment of the court below.

Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act is quoted as it is.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of criminal punishment, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (Consideration favorable circumstances in the front);

1. Article 62-2 (1) of the Criminal Act, Article 59 of the Act on Probation, etc. of Social Service Orders;