A. The Defendant of mistake of facts is merely a vehicle at the entrance of the gas station of this case at the wind before the gas station of this case, and the Defendant did not park the vehicle at the entrance of the gas station for the purpose of obstructing the victim’s business.

In addition, the time when the defendant's vehicle was prevented in front of the victim's gas station was a little time, and there was no vehicle that had been trying to use the victim's gas station, so it cannot be deemed that there was a danger to the victim's gas station business.

Nevertheless, the court below found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case, and there is an error of law by misunderstanding the facts.

B. Even if not, on the basis of an unreasonable sentencing decision, the sentence imposed by the court below (700,000 won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts, (1) the defendant did not park a vehicle in the oil station, the following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, i.e., the defendant presented a witness to drive a vehicle after the victim D's oral dispute, ② the place where the defendant's vehicle was installed is in a neutral state as argued by the defendant in domestic affairs, even if the defendant's vehicle was in a neutral state, there seems to be no possibility of moving the vehicle into the entrance of the oil station at the victim's entrance, ③ the defendant was on board the vehicle after being set up with D and connected with G, and the defendant was on board the vehicle after being set up with D and immediately the defendant's vehicle was moved. In full view of the fact that the defendant's vehicle was parked in front of the victim's oil station by driving his own vehicle. Thus, the defendant's assertion on this issue is not acceptable.

(2) interference with business.