1. Examining the grounds of appeal by Defendant A in light of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court and the first instance court, the lower court’s determination that the Defendant was guilty of the facts charged in this case on the grounds stated in its reasoning is justifiable.

There is no illegality of exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or of misapprehending the legal principles on the crime of interference with business and legitimate acts.

In addition, pursuant to Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment or imprisonment without prison labor for more than ten years has been imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed, and thus, in this case where a fine has been imposed against the defendant, the argument that the punishment is too unreasonable

2. Examining the grounds of appeal by Defendant B, G, and I in accordance with the evidence duly admitted and examined by the first instance court and the first instance court, the lower court is justifiable to have found the Defendants guilty of the facts charged in this case on the grounds stated in its reasoning.

There is no illegality of exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or of misapprehending the legal principles on the crime of interference with business.

3. Examining the grounds of appeal by Defendant F in light of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court and the first instance court, the lower court’s determination that the Defendant was guilty of the facts charged in this case on the grounds stated in its reasoning is justifiable.

There is no error of exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or not clarifying the facts of crime.

4. Examining the grounds of appeal by Defendant K in light of the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court and the first instance court, the lower court’s judgment against the above Defendant on the grounds stated in its reasoning.