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. Where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the original judgment in the appellate court’s judgment, and the sentencing of the lower court is not beyond the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015, etc.). Defendant shows an attitude to recognize and reflect his/her mistake.

The victim expressed his/her intention that the victim is not subject to the punishment of the defendant from the investigative agency, while the victim is not subject to the injury of the victim.

The defendant has no criminal history exceeding a suspended sentence.

On the other hand, the crime of this case is very bad in light of the time and interval of the crime committed, the degree of violence used by the defendant, etc., as so-called “cat violence,” which was committed by the defendant when the victim was in a personal relationship, and the cellular phone is damaged and damaged.

In particular, the victim seems to have been exposed to the violence of the defendant in addition to the crime of this case, so the victim used the defendant due to the relationship between the defendant and the defendant.

Even in order to cease the violence, it is inevitable to punish the defendant.

In full view of the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means, consequence, circumstances after the crime was committed, etc., the sentencing of the lower court does not seem to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion, taking into account all the sentencing conditions and sentencing criteria as indicated in the instant argument.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit.

3. As such, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit.