The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

except that, for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. The sentencing of the lower court (two years of imprisonment and of confiscation) is too unreasonable in light of the gist of the grounds for appeal by the Defendant.

2. The fact that the defendant has three times of violence, and the defendant inflicts a serious injury on the victim with a deadly weapon, which is disadvantageous to the defendant.

On the other hand, there are circumstances favorable to the defendant, such as the fact that the defendant confessions the crime from the investigative agency and repents the mistake, that the crime of this case occurred somewhat contingently, and that the defendant paid the victim's bereaved family members and sought a letter of agreement, and his bereaved family members do not want the punishment against the defendant.

In addition, the sentencing guidelines set forth in the argument of the Supreme Court, such as the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, motive and background of the crime of this case, and circumstances after the crime of this case, are considered as follows: The sentencing guidelines set forth in the sentencing guidelines set up by the Sentencing Committee of the Supreme Court: The sentencing guidelines set up by the Sentencing Committee of the Supreme Court shall be considered as follows: (a) the mitigated area (including a person who has been specially mitigated), (b) the mitigated area (including a serious effort to recover damage), and (c) the mitigated area of punishment (including a person who has been subject to punishment for habitual injury, repeated injury, special injury, and special injury).

Therefore, since the appeal by the defendant is well-grounded, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the following decision is

[Discied reasoning of the judgment below] Criminal facts and summary of evidence recognized by the court is identical to the facts constituting a crime and summary of evidence, and thus, the summary of evidence is identical to each corresponding column of the judgment below. Thus, it is acceptable in accordance with Article 369 of

Application of Statutes

1. Article 3 (1) and Article 2 (1) 3 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act concerning the crime, Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act;

2. Articles 53 and 55(1) of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation.