The judgment below

Of them, the part on Defendant B shall be reversed.

Defendant

B A person shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

except that this shall not apply.

1. Grounds for appeal;

A. Although it was true that misunderstanding of facts A (Defendant A) committed an act of misunderstanding of facts toward the victim, Defendant A’s act of causing beer disease was not broken by the victim due to beer disease; Defendant A did not display a beerer disease with the intent to injure the victim; and Defendant did not initiate or intentionally commit an attempted special injury, and there was no intention to commit an attempted special injury. 2) Unfair sentencing (original trial: one year and six months of imprisonment, three years of probation, three years of probation, and 240 hours of community service order)

B. Defendant B’s unreasonable sentencing decision (the original decision: 10 months of imprisonment)

2. Determination

A. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, Defendant A’s assertion of mistake is a factor favorable to the Defendant, such as: (a) Defendant A’s failure to commit a crime of determining unreasonable sentencing; (b) failure to agree with the victim; (c) failure to agree with the victim to escape to China and no opportunity for the victim to escape to China; and (d) failure to agree with the victim.

However, the Defendant’s assertion that the victim was not neglected due to beer disease does not seem to be contradictory, and the degree of damage suffered by the victim does not seem to be weak, and there is no change in sentencing conditions to deem that maintaining the sentencing of the lower court is unreasonable.

In light of such circumstances, the sentence of the lower court cannot be deemed to be unfair because it is too unreasonable in light of the following: (a) the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, motive and background of the crime, and circumstances after the crime occurred in the instant pleadings.

Therefore, Defendant A’s assertion of unreasonable sentencing is without merit.

B. Defendant B’s criminal act is recognized, there is no criminal record subject to punishment in Korea, the crime of this case is committed for not less than six months, and the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, and committing other crimes.