The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence (3 million won in penalty) declared by the court below on the gist of the grounds of appeal is deemed to be too unhutiled and unfair.

2. In the past, the Defendant, while under the influence of alcohol, assaulted the victims of the first two victims of the instant crime without any particular reason in the state of multi-faceted exploitation, without any specific reason, even though he had had a record of being subject to punishment (7 times a punishment).

As long as the nature of the crime of this case and the circumstances of the crime are considerably poor, and the defendant's wrong drinking habits is not improved, the risk of recidivism still remains.

I seem to appear.

The victims are trying to punish the defendant.

However, the Defendant recognized all the crimes of this case, and reflects his mistake, and the degree of damage of this case is not very heavy.

The crime of this case appears to have been committed under the influence of alcohol by the Defendant under the influence of alcohol. The Defendant, after the crime of this case, seems to have been committed, appears to have been under the influence of alcohol and sustained treatment of alcohol dependence in the future while showing his own drinking and aggressive action problems arising therefrom, etc. are being treated in good faith after the crime of this case.

There are many things.

There is no criminal offense beyond the fine against the defendant.

In full view of the above circumstances, comprehensively considering the Defendant’s age, sex, career, environment, family relationship, motive and background of the instant crime, means and method, results, etc., and all the sentencing conditions indicated in the pleadings and records, such as the Defendant’s age, sex, career, family relationship, and the background before and after the instant crime, it seems more reasonable to impose a sentence on the Defendant, rather than immediately isolation from society, to give the Defendant an opportunity to repeat as a member of society only once. Therefore, it cannot be deemed unfair because the sentence imposed by the lower court is too uneasible.

Therefore, prosecutor's assertion is not accepted.

3. The appeal by the prosecutor of conclusion is with merit.