The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair punishment) of the lower court's sentencing (two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

However, there are circumstances favorable to the defendant, such as the fact that the defendant seems to have been under the influence of alcohol at the time of each of the crimes in this case, and that the mistake is recognized and reflected.

However, each of the crimes of this case committed assaulting the victim E (the age of 64) face by gathering plastic chairs, which are dangerous objects without any reason, and destroying the victim F (the age of 63) by hand, thereby causing bodily harm to each of the above victims in need of approximately 4 weeks and 2 weeks, and preventing customers from entering the convenience point of the victim G (the age of 42) by avoiding disturbance from entering the convenience point of the victim G (the age of 42). In light of the content, motive, means and method of the crime, and the degree of injury suffered by E, the crime is very bad, and the reflective and violent nature of the defendant is obvious in the course of the crime.

In addition, since the defendant committed each of the crimes of this case during the period of repeated crime due to the crime of interference with business, it is inevitable to sentence the sentence.

Considering the fact that there are many criminal records of the same kind, the victims have not made efforts to recover damage, the lower court sentenced the lower court that is close to the lower limit of the punishment (one year and six months of imprisonment) after discretionary mitigation, and all other circumstances that form the conditions for the sentencing specified in this case, the lower court’s sentencing cannot be deemed to be too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.