The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (one year and six months of imprisonment) is excessively unreasonable.

B. The above sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. The circumstances favorable to the Defendant are as follows: (a) the Defendant recognized all of the instant crimes and reflects the fact that the Defendant appears to have committed the instant crime in a somewhat contingent and contingent manner; (b) the Defendant has no record of punishment exceeding the fine; and (c) there are family members to support the Defendant; and (d) the branch of the Defendant wanting to support the Defendant.

On the other hand, the crime of this case is committed by the defendant carrying a dangerous object, which is a parking problem, and prices the victim, in light of the details of the crime, method of the crime, and contents, etc., it is not good to commit the crime. The victim suffered injuries, such as inside and outside of the house, fel, fel, sake, sake, and waste convergence, which are the permanent real name of the friendly letter, and in particular, it seems that the victim is likely to live a life in a state where he must undergo a big inconvenience in daily life. The victim seems to have suffered serious physical and mental pain, and the victim complained of it, and wanting to punish the defendant. The crime of this case occurred at a place where many people pass through the middle of Korea at the same time. The victim seems to have experienced apprehension and fear to nearby residents, etc. who observed it.

In addition to the above circumstances, considering the various factors of sentencing indicated in the records, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means, and consequence of the crime, the circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence imposed by the lower court appears to be unreasonable and unreasonable, and it does not seem to be unreasonable.

Therefore, the prosecutor's argument of unfair sentencing is reasonable, and the defendant's argument.