The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

The Defendant was punished as an act of violence from around 2004 to 11, and was sentenced on October 26, 2012 to one year and six months by violating the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act at the Ulsan District Court on May 9, 2013, and completed the execution of the sentence. Since the Defendant again committed the instant crime at only five days after the execution of the sentence was completed, it should be deemed that there was a habit of violence against the Defendant, the lower court, which did not recognize it, erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine.

In light of the overall circumstances of the instant case of unfair sentencing, the sentence imposed by the lower court (7 million won of a fine) on the Defendant is too uneasible and unfair.

Judgment

The lower court determined that the part of the Defendant’s injury inflicted on the victim in the instant crime is insufficient to readily conclude that the Defendant’s injury was committed as a habit of violence, taking into account the Defendant’s criminal records prior to the instant crime, the details of the instant crime, and the degree of the type of the Defendant’s use of the victim.

The court below should take into account all the circumstances such as the defendant's age, character, occupation and environment, motive, method and place of the crime, time interval with the crime committed prior to the crime, and similarity with the contents of the crime. The violence prior to the crime in this case was derived from the organized violence of the defendant and the collective action inside the crime. On the other hand, the motive and form of the crime in this case are different from that of the defendant's friendship or personal drinking place, and if the defendant was under the influence of alcohol, it is possible to seriously assault the victim, but the victim was followed by the defendant.