The judgment below

Examining the evidence duly adopted by the first instance court, which maintained the reasoning of the lower court, the lower court was justifiable to have found the Defendant guilty of interference with one’s business on November 16, 2014 and January 24, 2015 among the facts charged in the instant case on the grounds stated in its reasoning. In so doing, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal.

In addition, examining the reasoning of the judgment below in light of the records, the court below's rejection of the defendant's claim on the mental and physical disorder based on the circumstances as stated in its holding, and there is no error of law by misunderstanding of the legal principles

In addition, pursuant 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 more than ten years is imposed, an appeal is permitted for the wrongful grounds for sentencing. Thus, the argument that the amount of the sentence is unfair is not a legitimate ground for appeal in this case where a more minor sentence is imposed against the defendant.

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