A. The Defendant misunderstanding the facts together at the time of the instant case

In the course of dispute with K, he had a consignee of the packing horse (hereinafter “instant packing horse”) as indicated in the judgment of the court below one time in the course of dispute, and thereafter there was only a dispute with the victim D (hereinafter “victim”) who is not the owner of the instant packing horse outside the packing horse of this case, and there was no power against the victim as described in the judgment of the court below or interference with the victim’s business within the packing horse of this case.

B. Legal principles cannot be deemed as a threat of force against a crime of interference with business by misapprehending the legal principles.

(c)

The punishment of the lower court (hereinafter referred to as 4,00,000 won) that is unfair in sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court based on the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court regarding the assertion of misunderstanding of facts, i.e., ① the victim prepared immediately after the instant case and submitted to the investigation agency on November 21, 2016, and the Defendant’s “the same waste as the Defendant was deemed to have been sold in

(a) is a series of illegal acts committed during funeral services;

다 뒤집는다 ”라고 말하였고, 떡볶이와 순대를 마구 뿌리쳐서 얼굴, 손, 옷 등에 튀었다는 취지로 기재하였고( 증거기록 14 쪽), 원심 법정에서는 피해자가 이 사건 포장마차와 꽃집을 운영하고 있는데, 일행과 싸우고 있는 피고인을 말렸더니, 피고인이 떡볶이가 있는 철판에 플라스틱 그릇을 쳐서 국물이 피해자의 얼굴과 이 사건 포장마차의 천정 등에 튀도록 하고 원심 판시 기재와 같이 욕설을 하였으며, 피고인이 소란을 피운 시간은 약 40분 정도 된다는 취지로 진술한 점, ② 피해자의 남편인 E은 수사기관에 제출한 2016. 11. 21. 자 진술서에 피고인이 장사를 못하게 만든다면서 욕설과 난동을 피운 사실이 있다고

The defendant is merely the defendant's assertion, such as the statement (16 pages of evidence records) and the defendant's argument.