The judgment below

Of them, the part concerning the crime of 2020 order 27 shall be reversed.

The defendant is guilty of the 2020 senior order 274 case.

1. The decision of the court below on the summary of the reasons for appeal (the crime of 2020 highest 57 cases: imprisonment of 3 million won, and the crime of 2020 highest 274: imprisonment of 10 months) is too unreasonable.

2. The Defendant already committed the instant crime even though he had the record of punishment several times due to the crime of violence.

In particular, at the time of preventing the Defendant from committing the crime of the 2020 Highest 274 case, the Defendant was indicted for committing the crime of the 2020 Highest 57 case and was at the same time under the suspension of execution due to the violation of the Road Traffic Act (the crime of drinking) in the judgment.

On the other hand, the defendant shows his attitude to recognize and reflect all of his crimes.

The victim B of the 2020 High 57 case is not subject to the punishment of the defendant, and the crime of the above case is in a concurrent relationship between the violation of the Road Traffic Act (refluence of alcohol measurement) and the violation of the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, which became final and conclusive after the suspension of execution of one year and two years, it is necessary to consider equality in the case where the judgment was rendered

The injury of the victim B and F was relatively minor.

The defendant did not directly price the victim E, and the type of force exercised to the victim F was not strong.

The Defendant made efforts to raise problems arising from his drinking, such as receiving treatment for alcohol addiction in the original trial process, etc.

Comprehensively taking into account the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, motive, means, consequence, and circumstances after the commission of the crime, including the above circumstances, the sentencing of the crime in the case of 2020 and 57 cases exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

Although it is not visible, the sentencing on the crime of 2020 highest 274 case is too unreasonable.

Therefore, there is no reason for the part concerning the crime of 2020 high 57 cases among the defendant's unfair argument for sentencing, but there is reason for the part concerning the crime of 2020 high 274 cases.

3. If so, the judgment of the court below is the first 2020 case and the second 274 case.