The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

Seized evidence No. 1 shall be confiscated.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant: Mental health and physical disability, and unreasonable sentencing 1) was drunk at the time of the instant crime, and was in a state of mental and physical disability. 2) The lower court’s punishment (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the records on the Defendant’s claim of mental disability, even though the Defendant was in a state of drinking alcohol at the time of the instant crime, in light of the content of each of the instant crimes, the background leading up to the commission of the crime, the means and method of the crime, and the circumstances before and after the instant crime, it is not deemed that the Defendant had the weak ability to discern things or make decisions at the time of the instant crime.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion of mental disability is without merit.

B. The instant crime on the assertion of unreasonable sentencing by the Defendant and the prosecutor is a case where the Defendant committed a serious injury in need of treatment for five weeks with the kitchen knife at the right frame of the victim living together, and the crime is not very good.

Although the crime of this case did not cause harm to the life of the victim due to the crime of this case, the crime of this case could cause serious harm to the life of the victim in light of the contents of the crime.

Before committing the instant crime, the Defendant exercised violence against the victim several times.

Nevertheless, the defendant did not receive a letter from the victim.

In light of such unfavorable circumstances, considering the favorable circumstances such as the fact that the defendant reflects the mistake or that the defendant has no criminal power exceeding the fine, the sentence of the court below is deemed to be too uneasible and unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit and the prosecutor's argument of unfair sentencing is with merit.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is reasonable, and the judgment of the court below is made in accordance with Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act.