A. In light of the fact that the criminal nature of the Defendant was extremely poor and the possibility of repeating the crime was crypted by repeating the same violent and serious crimes such as the instant injury, obstruction of performance of official duties, intrusion upon residence, theft, etc. without any particular reason even though the Defendant had a large number of criminal records, the punishment imposed by the lower court (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. In light of the circumstances and contents of each of the instant crimes committed by the Defendant, the Defendant made a confession of all of the instant crimes, and thus, in depth reflects the mistake. In light of the fact that each of the instant crimes was derived from the qualitative characteristics of the Defendant, especially vulnerable to alcohol, and that the Defendant appears to have the intent to overcome the alcohol respect, the above punishment of the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. The court below sentenced the above punishment to the defendant on the grounds of sentencing as stated in its reasoning. The prosecutor and the defendant's assertion are deemed to have been given due consideration to the above circumstances in the court below, and there is no particular change in the conditions of sentencing after the judgment of the court below, as well as other factors such as the defendant's age, health, character and behavior and environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the court below's punishment is too minor in light of the above factors as stated in the records of this case.

It is not likely that it is improper or uneasible.

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