Defendant

The appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair punishment) of the original judgment (two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. It is reasonable to take into account the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant’s mistake is divided into and against his/her own mistake; (b) the fact that the Defendant appears to have committed a contingent crime in a state of mental disorder caused by alcohol; and (c) the fact that he/she was suffering from alcohol dependence after committing the crime.

However, the crime of this case is a situation unfavorable to the defendant, such as the fact that the defendant's shouldered a part of the victim's head head and inflicted bodily injury upon him by drinking, and that it is not good to the nature of the crime, that the defendant committed the crime of this case without being aware of even during the period of repeated offense, that the defendant has the same criminal records, that the defendant was not agreed with the victim, and that the damage was not recovered.

In this context, the recommended sentence according to the sentencing guidelines set by the Sentencing Committee of the Supreme Court at the Sentencing Committee is not deemed to be unfair because the sentence of the court below is too unreasonable in full view of the following: (a) the period of imprisonment for a term of 2 years to 4 years; (b) the group of violent crimes; (c) the special injury; (d) the type of 1; (e) the basic area; and (e) the scope of the recommended sentence (two to four years); and (e) the Defendant’s age, character and conduct;

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is groundless. It is so decided as per Disposition.