The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Sentencing sentencing on the gist of grounds for appeal (the sentence of the lower court shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for five months);

2. The appellate court’s judgment is reasonable to respect the first-class sentencing judgment in a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first-class judgment, and the first-class sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion.

The following circumstances, i.e., the Defendant agreed with the victim, the economic situation of the Defendant’s company operated by the Defendant is not good, and the Defendant against the instant crime is favorable to the Defendant.

However, the following circumstances appear in the records and arguments of the original judgment and the political party, namely, ① the defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence on July 20, 2016 due to interference with business affairs, etc., and ② the defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of imprisonment for a crime of violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a group deadly weapon, etc.) in 2013 (Supreme Court Decision 2013No 565 Decided June 21, 2013), and the defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of imprisonment for a crime of interference with business affairs committed during the suspended sentence period (Supreme Court Decision 2016Da409 Decided July 20, 2016), and each of the above crimes committed against the defendant on April 7, 2017, without being sentenced to a suspended sentence of imprisonment for a period of 2016 (Supreme Court Decision 201Da1409 Decided July 20, 2016).

The judgment is disadvantageous to the defendant.

As above, the defendant's age, sex, environment, circumstances leading to the crime, means, and results are considered in favor of or unfavorable to the defendant.