The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of five million won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. The lower court’s sentence (three million won of a fine) against the Defendant as to the summary of the grounds for appeal is unreasonable as it is too unhued.

2. The judgment of the court below stated that the defendant would not commit the crime of this case again while deceiving and opposing the crime of this case, and that the amount of damage of this case is not significant.

On the other hand, the defendant was sentenced to four months of imprisonment due to the crime of causing property damage, and again committed the crime of this case in the last month of the 2010s.

Prior to the crime of this case, the Defendant sought violence repeatedly by finding out the situation of the elderly in this case where the elderly who had been unable to cope with violence was gathered. After having been convicted, the Defendant was sentenced to the suspension of the execution of imprisonment once as a crime of violating the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Intimidation, etc.) by threatening the elderly for the purpose of retaliation.

The victim(D) stated that the defendant was under the influence of alcohol even after the second week of the crime of this case and expressed that he was able to find it in the situation of older persons, and that he was able to take a bath for older persons, and the defendant was punished.

In addition, comprehensively taking account of the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, family relations, circumstances after the crime, and all the sentencing conditions indicated in the instant pleadings, the lower court’s punishment against the Defendant is deemed to be too uneasible and unfair. Therefore, the prosecutor’s above assertion is with merit.

3. As such, the prosecutor's appeal is with merit, and the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is again decided as follows.

【Grounds for the Judgment of the Supreme Court which has been written] The facts constituting a crime and summary of evidence recognized by the court are identical to the facts constituting a crime in the original judgment, and the summary of evidence is identical to each corresponding column of the original judgment. Thus, they are cited in accordance with Article

Application of Statutes

1. Article 36 of the Criminal Act and Article 366 of the Criminal Act concerning the crime, the choice of fines;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The order of provisional payment;