The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

1. The lower court’s sentencing is too unreasonable on the grounds of appeal.

2. Considering the fact that the crime of this case is not good, and that the defendant committed the crime of this case during the period of repeated crime resulting from the same crime even though he had several criminal records for the same kind of crime, strict punishment against the defendant is needed.

However, considering the fact that the defendant's mistake is divided, that the defendant agreed with all victims in the trial, and that the defendant's age, sex and environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, the court below's punishment is too unreasonable. Thus, the above argument by the defendant is justified.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the defendant's appeal is with merit, and the judgment below is ruled again as follows.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts charged and the summary of the evidence recognized by the court is identical to the facts stated in the corresponding column of the judgment below, and thus, they are quoted in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Article 329 of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime (a point of section 329 of the Criminal Act), Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act (a point of violence) and Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act (a point of interference with business), and the choice of imprisonment for the crime;

1. Article 35 of the Criminal Act for aggravated repeated crimes;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;