The appeal by the prosecutor is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment with prison labor for 6 months and 2 years of suspended execution) is deemed to be too uneasible and unfair.

2. The fact that the defendant was punished for the same kind of crime several times, that the defendant did not seem to have made a serious effort to recover from damage, that the defendant committed violence as stated in paragraph (1) of the crime of the original judgment even though he had been in the period of suspension of execution due to the same crime, and that the defendant continuously exercised violence against neighbors, and that there is a high risk of re-offending, etc. are disadvantageous to the defendant.

However, as a result of the increase in the number of offenses by the Defendant, the elderly, the degree of injury of the victim, and Twitman, who is the defendant's seat, wanting to take the guidance of the Defendant, various sentencing conditions such as Defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, motive, means and consequence after the crime, and the following circumstances, and the scope of the recommended sentence according to the sentencing guidelines of the Supreme Court in regard to the crime of this case from April to March of imprisonment with prison labor, not more than 2 years and not more than 3 months: violent crime group, general injury group, special form of punishment, special form of punishment (general injury), decision on the recommended area, majority punishment (basic area), majority punishment scope (4 to January 16): April to March of the year; major reasons for suspended sentence are not positive (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Da144488, Apr. 2, 200).

3. The final appeal by the prosecutor is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the final appeal by the prosecutor is groundless. It is so decided as per Disposition