The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentencing of the lower court (two years of suspended sentence in eight months of imprisonment) is too large and unfair.

2. We examine the judgment, and it is recognized that the defendant recognized all of the crimes of this case and reflects his mistake, and that the defendant agreed smoothly with the victims.

However, even before committing each of the crimes of this case, the Defendant had been punished by suspended sentence and fine two times due to a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint injury), and each of the crimes of violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. (collective violence, deadly weapons, etc.) committed with dangerous objects while in possession of assault is subject to imprisonment with prison labor for a limited term of not less than one year. The court below sentenced two years of suspended sentence in August of imprisonment with prison labor by discretionary mitigation. In full view of the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, intelligence and environment, motive and circumstance of the crime, method, method and consequence of the crime, criminal records, and circumstances before and after the crime, etc., the sentence imposed by the court below is too unreasonable. Thus, the Defendant’s assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal of this case is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, since the defendant's appeal of this case is groundless. It is so decided as per Disposition.