A. The Defendant, by threat of force, did not interfere with the sales of the victim’s cosmetics or committed an indecent act by force against the victim.

B. Even if the Defendant committed each of the instant crimes, the Defendant was in a state of mental and physical loss or mental weakness by drinking alcohol at the time.

(c)

The punishment sentenced by the court below to the defendant (one hundred months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the grounds for appeal

A. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, the fact that the Defendant obstructed the victim’s cosmetics sales business by force by avoiding disturbance in the victim’s cosmetics store as stated in the lower judgment, and that the Defendant committed an indecent act by force at the same time and place.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below did not err in the misconception of facts as alleged by the defendant, and the defendant's assertion of facts is without merit.

B. According to the records on the assertion of mental disorder, even though the Defendant was deemed to have committed each of the crimes of this case under drinking, in view of the circumstances after the Defendant committed each of the crimes of this case, the circumstances leading to each of the crimes of this case, the circumstances leading to each of the crimes of this case, and the Defendant’s behavior at the time of the commission of each of the crimes of this case, the Defendant was in a state that the Defendant was unable or lacks the ability to make decisions

Therefore, the defendant's mental and physical disability argument is without merit.

(c)

Although there are no circumstances to consider the circumstances, such as the fact that the damage caused by each of the instant crimes was not significantly serious, and that the Defendant’s health status is not good, the lower court has already determined the punishment by taking into account the circumstances favorable to the Defendant, and the sentencing may be newly considered after the sentence of the lower judgment.