2. It is reasonable that there are circumstances that can be considered in light of the circumstances, such as the fact that the Defendant recognized all the crimes of this case as well as the mistake thereof in depth, did not directly harm the body of the victim, and the degree of power in obstruction of business is relatively heavy, and the Defendant did not want the punishment of the Defendant by mutual consent with the victim.

However, on the other hand, the defendant, on June 12, 2012, filed a complaint with the victim under the charge of destroying and damaging property or interfering with business of the victim because he/she had obstructed the business of the entrance door door door door of the restaurant operated by the victim. The crime of this case was committed on two occasions in the same city, with the aim of the defendant's finding the above restaurant more than twice again, and threatening the victim to cancel the above complaint, and by force obstructing the restaurant business, the crime was not less than the nature of the crime. On April 1, 2011, the defendant committed the crime of this case without being aware of the fact that he/she was sentenced to the suspension of execution for six months or more due to the violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents at the Incheon District Court's Vice-Support, which was sentenced to the punishment for the crime of this case, and the punishment for the crime of this case was sentenced to imprisonment for not less than one year. The defendant's age, character and behavior, the defendant's environment, motive and circumstances of the defendant, etc.

3. If so, the defendant's appeal is without merit. Thus, the defendant's appeal is dismissed under Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.