The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the reasons for appeal (six months of imprisonment) by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. The judgment of the court below recognizes the crime of this case as against the defendant, that the victim does not want the punishment of the defendant, and that the victim's injury is relatively minor, etc. However, even though the defendant was sentenced to a fine on two occasions during the period of repeated crime, he again commits the crime of this case during the period of repeated crime even though he was sentenced to a fine on two occasions, and he was punished by a fine, and he again commits the crime of this case during the period of repeated crime, and other various circumstances, including the defendant's age, character, character, environment, family relationship, circumstances after the crime, etc., which are the conditions for the punishment of this case, it is not recognized that the court below's punishment is too unreasonable. Thus, the defendant and his defense counsel's allegation of unfair sentencing is not accepted.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.

1. Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act for the Detention in Labor House;

1. Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that since it is apparent that the phrase "Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act is a clerical error, it shall be corrected as ex officio deletion pursuant to Article 25(

.