2. The instant crime of this case regarding the grounds of appeal is a serious injury to the victim E, which requires treatment for about 43 days, in light of the fact that the Defendant repeatedly committed the instant crime, despite the fact that the Defendant had a record of punishment of fine 2,00,000,00 won, which is a dangerous object, while making a claim against the ground construction work against the victim E, and threatened the victim F with the kitchen, which is a dangerous object to the victim F, and the nature of the relevant crime and the criminal situation are not good. The Defendant’s act of this case repeatedly committed the instant crime, in light of the following: (a) the victim’s wife E in this case’s case’s repair of the house, and (b) the victim’s wife in this case’s repair of the house, caused the injury requiring treatment for about 4 weeks, and (c) the victim’s severe punishment for the Defendant’s wife by failing to reach an agreement between the victims and the victim.

However, the defendant's mistake is recognized in depth, the defendant seems to have committed the crime of this case by contingency, the defendant deposited a total of KRW 15 million for victim E and paid KRW 4,400,00 for hospital expenses on behalf of the court below, deposited KRW 1,000 for victim F; the defendant deposited KRW 1,00,000 for the victim's money; the defendant did not have any record of punishment heavier than a fine; the defendant was aged 73 years old and has no record of health due to high blood pressure and urology, etc.; and other factors such as the defendant's age, character, environment, criminal record, circumstance and consequence leading to the crime of this case; and the situation before and after the crime of this case, the prosecutor's assertion of unfair sentencing is not recognized as unfair since the sentence of the court below is too uneasible.