The judgment below

Of those, the conviction against Defendant A shall be reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of two years and six months.

. Prosecutors;

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In light of the records of punishment of Defendant A (1) in the misapprehension of the legal principle and the similarity of each of the facts charged in the instant case, the attack, damage to property, and intimidation in each of the instant crimes are not recognized as habitually.

(2) The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (three years and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. In full view of the following: (a) the public prosecutor (1) misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles, the Defendants could have sufficiently predicted that Defendant B would assault G, the president of the Kafbook, and that Defendant B used the act of assaulting the Defendant B; (b) Defendant B used the act of assaulting G in compliance with the Defendant A’s instructions; and (c) Defendant A’s defect that Defendant B attempted to continue to engage in the act of assaulting the Victim B.

(2) Each sentence of the lower court on the grounds of unfair sentencing (Defendant A: Imprisonment for six months, suspension of execution of two years, community service hours, probation period of 80 hours, etc.) is unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The phrase “Habitual” under Article 2(1) of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act as to Defendant A’s assertion of misapprehension of the legal doctrine does not mean only the habitual nature between each of the crimes listed in each subparagraph of the same paragraph, but it is reasonable to interpret that the term “Habitualness” means the habition of all the crimes listed in each subparagraph of the same paragraph.

Therefore, if a person with the above habitive behavior commits another type of crime as stipulated in each subparagraph of Article 2(1) of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, each act constitutes a comprehensive crime of habitual violence, which is the most severe statutory penalty among each subparagraph. The existence of habitual violence as stipulated in the above provision of the Act is similar to the defendant's age, character, occupation, environment, fact, motive, means and place of the crime, interval between the crime committed before and after, and the contents of the crime.