Expenses of the trial shall be borne by the defendant.

A. Fact-misunderstanding and misapprehension of legal principles regarding attempted larceny (1) the Defendant only tried to see the victim’s clothes, and did not have attempted to steal the victim’s clothes as stated in the facts charged. (2) With respect to interference with business, the customer’s passage to the future is most part of the time when the age club was terminated, but the passage of the customer who will turn back to the future is not included in the business of the age club.

Nevertheless, since all of the facts charged in this case were found guilty, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles.

B. The sentence that the court below sentenced against the defendant (the penalty amount of KRW 2,500,00) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) Determination of misapprehension of the facts and legal principles as to attempted larceny 1) and various circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, namely, the defendant used a different table from the victim at the time of committing the crime. At the time of the crime, the victim was in a state of locked and the victim was requested to bring his clothes to the defendant, not the victim's request; although the age club employee took away the victim's clothes from the defendant, he attempted to bring the victim's clothes again, the defendant was trying to bring the victim's clothes again; in order to prevent the defendant from bringing the victim's clothes, employees were punished for a considerable period of time; the victim's consistent statement made by the victim (the victim directly observed the defendant's clothes) (the victim directly appeared), and the victim's intent and intent to obtain the victim's clothes as stated in the facts charged was sufficiently recognized.

Therefore, it is true.