The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant only fightingd D’s fighting with a contingency and did not actively commit violence against the victim.

Although the father of the defendant tried to reach an agreement with the victim, there was a circumstance that the victim's consent was too much much than the situation of the defendant, making it difficult to implement the agreement, and it is expected to compensate for the damage even through the next deposit procedure.

Although there was a record of juvenile protective disposition in the past against juvenile resistance, the defendant was employed in a cell phone store after he left a high school with his spirit immediately later and graduated from the high school due to official examination notice.

In full view of these circumstances, the sentence imposed by the court below (4 months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. In full view of the circumstances in which the Defendant’s age, sex, career, family relation, environment, motive, means, and result of the crime, circumstances after the crime, criminal experience, and special larceny, which became final and conclusive on October 1, 2015, and all of the sentencing factors in the records and pleadings, including the following facts: (a) favorable or unfavorable circumstances to the Defendant; and (b) the Defendant’s age, sex, career, family relation, environment, motive, means and consequence; and (c) the crime of this case is ex post concurrent crimes

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition, since the defendant's appeal is without merit.