The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

1. The sentence of the lower court (eight months of imprisonment) against the Defendant on the summary of the grounds of appeal is too unreasonable.

2. The crime of this case in the judgment of the court below is established that the defendant interfered with the main business of the victim D, the restaurant business of the victim K, the damage of the victim D's property, the crime of this case in the victim H, and the victim H inflicted bodily harm, such as sprinking, which requires approximately two weeks of medical treatment, and the defendant was provided with alcohol, sprinking, entertainment entertainment services in an amount of 180,000 won by deceiving the victim N, and the crime of this case is heavy in light of the contents of the crime. In particular, the defendant interfered with the victim D's main business twice for four days, and even if he was tried on a part of the crime of this case, it seems that there is a high risk of repeating the crime, and that the defendant had a power to be punished for the same crime, and there is no other unfavorable circumstances that are disadvantageous to the defendant.

However, considering the fact that the defendant led to the confession of the crime of this case and reflects the defendant's misjudgments in depth through confinement for a considerable period of time, that the victim does not want punishment, that there is no record of criminal punishment exceeding a suspended sentence, that the defendant is in a position to support her mother (physical disability Grade 4), that her mother is in a position to support her mother (math class 4), that her mother seems to clearly have a social ties relationship with the defendant, such as the defendant's age, sexual behavior, environment, etc. In addition, the court below's punishment against the defendant is too unreasonable if considering the whole circumstances, which form the conditions for sentencing specified in the arguments of this case, such as the defendant's age, sexual behavior, environment, etc.

Therefore, the defendant's argument of sentencing is justified.

3. As such, the defendant's appeal is with merit. Thus, the judgment below is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is subject to pleading.