The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

1. The sentence of the lower court against the accused (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. In light of the following: (a) the Defendant, who was sentenced to a punishment for committing a crime related to the same type of violence as the instant case, committed the instant crime during the period of repeated crime for which one year has not yet passed after having been released from the court; (b) the risk of recidivism is very high; and (c) the nature and circumstances of the crime and the crime are not provided for in light of the means of the crime, it is inevitable to sentence the Defendant to imprisonment

However, considering the following factors: (a) the Defendant committed the instant crime in a profoundly against his mistake while committing the instant crime; and (b) the Defendant seems to have seriously been aware of the importance of the laws and regulations through confinement life for the remaining three months; and (c) the Defendant’s age, character, character, environment, health conditions, motive for committing the instant crime and circumstances after committing the instant crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment against the Defendant is too unreasonable.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act as the defendant's appeal is with merit, and the following judgment is rendered again after pleading.

[Discied Judgment] The criminal facts recognized by the court and the summary of the evidence are the same as the entries of each corresponding column of the judgment of the court below. Thus, they are cited in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Article 261 of the Criminal Act, Articles 261 and 260 (1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of imprisonment for a crime;

1. Article 35 of the Criminal Act among repeated crimes;