A. (1) The Defendant’s misapprehension of the legal principle (the point of destruction and damage) cutting down the decline chain of the Victim D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “victim Co., Ltd.”) constitutes a legitimate act since the Victim Co., Ltd. first depriveded the Defendant’s possession of the instant thesis.

(2) The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (2 million won by fine) is too unreasonable.

B. The meaning of guaranteeing the Defendant’s business prior to the second entrance in the instant agreement concluded between the Defendant and the victim company should be interpreted as guaranteeing the business to the extent that it does not interfere with the business of other occupant merchants.

However, since the Defendant installed a glara and Mongolian content to the extent that he or she has almost every two entrances in front of the two entrances, it shall be deemed that the scope of the exercise of rights is considerably deviating from the scope of the exercise of rights and thereby hindering the business of other occupant merchants.

Even if the defendant has a civil right to possess the second entrance prior to the second entrance, if the possession has reached the degree of interference with business in light of the mode of conduct, the crime of interference with business is established.

The same shall also apply to the act of harming the direction of CCTV.

(2) The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant asserted that the lower court had the same purport as this, and the lower court rejected the judgment on the assertion of justifiable act.

According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, the court below's finding of facts and determination are justified, and this part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.

B. We look at the following circumstances that the court below clearly explained in detail about the prosecutor's assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of the legal principles, and that can be seen by the records of this case.