The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The habit of a misunderstanding of facts, and that of a misunderstanding of legal principles and that of a misunderstanding of violence must be distinguished from each other, so the Defendant cannot be admitted to the habit of an injury.

Nevertheless, the court below erred by misunderstanding the facts or by misunderstanding the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. At the time of the instant crime, the Defendant had weak ability to discern things or make decisions.

(c)

The punishment of the court below (one year and three months of imprisonment) which is unfair in sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Determination on the misapprehension of facts and misapprehension of legal principles

A. Article 2(1) of the former Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (amended by Act No. 13718, Jan. 6, 2016; hereinafter “former Act”) provides that “a person who habitually commits any of the following offenses shall be punished in accordance with the following classifications:

Article 2(1) of the former Act on the Punishment of Violence, etc., which was amended by Act No. 13718 on Jan. 6, 2016, provides that “Absentity under Article 2(1) of the former Act, is not habitually among the crimes listed in each subparagraph of the same paragraph, but is interpreted as a habit of violence, which covers all the crimes listed in each subparagraph of the same paragraph (see Supreme Court Decision 2008Do3657, Aug. 21, 2008; Supreme Court Decision 2013Do2095, Apr. 26, 2013). As such, the Act on the Punishment of Violence, etc., which was amended by Act No. 13718, Jan. 6, 2016, did not separate the transitional provisions by deleting Article 2(1).

The purpose of deletion of Article 2(1) of the former Act, which provides for an aggravated constituent element for violent crimes as prescribed by the Criminal Act, is to eliminate the elements of the aggravated constituent element, even if the general risk of the habition of an act of violence, which covers the crimes listed in each subparagraph of the same paragraph, is to consider as a sign of the aggravated constituent element, the background and specific form of an individual crime.