The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. As to the crime of habitual injury as indicated in the judgment below, there is no violence against the defendant.

B. As to the crime of habitual injury and crime of interference with business, the Defendant committed an offense under the influence of alcohol, under the influence of alcohol, under the lack of capacity to discern things or make decisions.

C. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In a judgment on the assertion of misapprehension of the legal principles, habitual injury refers to a criminal's tendency and the nature that forms the essence of the act, rather than the nature that forms the character of the offender. As such, whether habitual injury committed in habitual injury ought to be determined by comprehensively taking into account various circumstances, such as the defendant's age, character, occupation, environment, past fact, motive, means, method and place of the crime, interval with the previous crime, and similarity with the contents of the crime.

(2) According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, the Defendant committed the instant violent act against the victim for about one year from September 7, 2017 to September 6, 2018. The Defendant used a non-discriminatory violent act against the neighbors, etc. on the ground that he is bad without any specific motive, and the Defendant was sentenced two times to imprisonment, three times suspension of execution, and six times a suspension of execution of official duties, and six times a repeated act during the period of the repeated act. In full view of all the circumstances such as the law and frequency of the instant violent act, interval of each crime, place of the crime, similarity of the crime, environment, motive of the crime, etc., it is reasonable to deem that the instant violent act constituted the Defendant’s violent act.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of legal principles.