A. The Defendant, as stated in the judgment of the court below, did not interfere with the business of the victim or threaten the victim by citing a shouldered sicker’s disease during a long period of time.

B. The lower court’s improper sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, the defendant can sufficiently recognize the fact that the defendant interfered with the victim's duties and satisfies over a long time as stated in the judgment of the court below.

In particular, the statements made in D/F investigative agencies and the court of original instance at the court below are not only specific and consistent with the details of the statements made by the Defendant due to interference with and intimidation from the Defendant and their present situation, but also parts that appear to lack reasonableness in light of the objective circumstances recognized by the record at the time of the instant case. Therefore, their credibility cannot be denied.

Therefore, Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

B. There are circumstances that the defendant has no record of imprisonment without prison labor or heavier punishment for the illegal defendant.

However, in light of the course and method of the instant crime, the nature of the crime is not good, and it has not been received from the injured party up to now, and there is no special change in circumstances to determine the punishment differently from the original judgment in the first instance.

In addition, considering the motive, means and result of the instant crime, the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, health status, previous convictions, and circumstances after the instant crime, the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable.

Therefore, Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit.