The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair punishment) of the original judgment (one year and eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

Judgment

The crime of this case was committed by the Defendant on the ground that the Defendant was not taking an examination for himself, and was inflicted an injury upon the victim’s face by drinking beer and beer, which is a dangerous object on the ground that the Defendant was not taking an examination for himself. In light of the risk of the type of crime, the crime of this case was serious, the Defendant did not agree with the victim, and the Defendant committed the crime of this case without being aware of it during the period of repeated crime.

However, it is reasonable to take into account the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant led to the instant crime and reflects his mistake in depth; (b) appears to have committed the instant crime in contingency; (c) deposited a total of KRW 3 million for recovery from damage up to the trial; (d) there was a family member to support; and (e) there was no record of having been punished for the same crime since 191.

In this context, comprehensively taking account of the scope of the recommended sentence with respect to the instant crime according to the sentencing guidelines established by the Sentencing Commission, the category 1 (Special Bodily Injury), special Bodily Bodily Bodily Bodily Bodily Bodily Bodily Bodily Injury Crime, Decision on the recommended field (Basic Field), the scope of the recommended sentence (two to four years), and other various sentencing conditions, such as Defendant age, character and conduct, environment, background of the instant crime, circumstances before and after the instant crime, etc., the sentence of the court below is somewhat unreasonable.

Criminal facts

The summary of facts constituting an offense and evidence recognized by this court shall be as shown in the respective columns of the judgment below.

Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act is quoted as it is.

Application of Statutes

1. Article 3 (1) and Article 2 (1) 3 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act concerning the crime, Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The proviso to Article 35 and the proviso to Article 42 of the Criminal Act among repeated offenders;

1. Mitigation of discretionary mitigation under Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act ( considered as favorable circumstances in the preceding);