The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

However, for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. As a matter of course, the lower court recognized the Defendant’s habitual nature of assault due to the fact that the instant crime was committed due to the development of assault habits, which the Defendant had, but the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby recognizing only the Defendant simply

B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (six months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, two years of probation) is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Habituality of the crime of judgment refers to any mistake of a criminal and the tendency of a crime, which is not the nature that forms the essence of the act, but the character that forms the character of the offender. Thus, whether habituality is habitual shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account various circumstances, such as the offender’s age, character, occupation, environment, motive, method and place of the act, time interval with the crime committed before, and similarity with the contents of the crime.

According to the evidence and records duly adopted and examined by the court below and the trial court, ① the defendant has been punished for 19 times as violence or injury up to the present day (including interference with business by force), ② the defendant was sentenced to imprisonment for a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act in 2004 and was punished for violence, injury, etc. at least twice every year since he was released from the court, and ③ it is difficult to find any motive to understand each crime as well as repeated violence and injury (including repeated violence and injury). (4) The crime of this case also committed the crime of this case on the ground that the victim or his neighboring person was committed violence, or merely did not receive his request, and that the victim or his neighboring person was aware of such an injury or injury.