The judgment below

Examining the evidence duly admitted by the first instance court, which maintained the reasoning, the lower court was justifiable to have determined that all of the facts charged in the instant case was guilty on the grounds stated in its reasoning.

In doing so, contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, there is no error of law by misunderstanding facts against logical and empirical rules or by misapprehending the legal principles on the crime of interference with business, violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes.

In addition, the argument that the defendant was in a state of mental disorder at the time of committing each of the crimes in this case is not a legitimate ground for appeal, as it is alleged in the ground of appeal that the defendant did not consider it as the ground for appeal or that the court below

In addition, the argument that the sentencing of the court below violates the principle of balanced calculation of crimes or the principle of accountability is ultimately unfair sentencing. According to Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in the case where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for not less than ten years is imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed. Thus, in this case where the defendant was sentenced to more minor punishment, the above argument to the above purport is not legitimate

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.