The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentencing of the lower court (two years of imprisonment) is excessively unreasonable.

B. The lower court’s sentencing of the prosecutor (e.g., indubly unfair) is unreasonable as it is too unhued.

2. The Defendant carried dangerous articles and inflicted injury on the victim. In light of the fact that an empty glass disease, which is a dangerous article, committed a cruel crime by getting the victim's head at least six times, leaving the victim's head, in violation of the part above the victim's interest with a shoulder glass disease, the victim suffered serious injury in need of approximately six weeks of treatment due to the crime in this case, and even prior to the crime in this case, even though there was the past record of criminal punishment for violent crime, the Defendant needs to bear a heavy liability corresponding to such act.

However, the court below's punishment against the defendant is too unreasonable in light of the circumstances favorable to the defendant, such as the defendant's age, career, character and behavior, environment, motive and circumstance of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc., taking into account the following factors: (a) the defendant led to the confession of the crime; (b) the victim does not want the punishment against the defendant by mutual consent with the victim; and (c) the victim, who is the disabled person at the time of the case, uses the words such as "stoves" and "stoves" to the defendant; and (d) the defendant is deemed to have committed an contingent crime by gathering the defendant as a human being; and (d) other factors that are favorable to the defendant, such as the defendant's age, career

Furthermore, the Prosecutor’s assertion that the lower court’s sentence is too weak in light of the aforementioned factors, such as that the Act on the Acceptance of Crimes was harsh and the nature of the crime is serious, and that the circumstance unfavorable to the sentencing asserted by the Prosecutor in the trial is already sufficiently considered in the lower court’s sentencing.