A defendant shall be punished by a fine of 500,000 won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

A. Although there is a little fact that a mistake of fact has a problem of communication with C Hospital staff, there is no little possibility that the defendant has exercised tangible power to obstruct the original duties and the receipt, and there was no intention to interfere with the defendant's business.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In the lower court’s determination of a mistake of fact, the Defendant asserted the same purport as the grounds for appeal in this part, and the lower court, based on its stated reasoning, determined that the Defendant interfered with the original duties and the intention of interference with business was also inferred.

In light of the statement of the director general of C Hospital and D and CCTV images in C Hospital, the judgment of the court below is just, and there is no error of misconception of facts as alleged by the defendant, and this part of the defendant's assertion is not accepted.

B. In full view of the following: (a) the Defendant suffers from dementia by age age; (b) the instant crime appears to have some problems in communication between the Defendant and C Hospital receipt staff; (c) the Defendant is a person of distinguished service to the State and is physically handicapped; and (d) there was no record of punishment for the same kind of crime; and (c) the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, character and conduct, intelligence and environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime; and (d) the circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment is unreasonable and thus, the Defendant

3. As such, the defendant's appeal is with merit, and the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the following decision is rendered after pleading

【Reason for the judgment of multiple times】 Criminal facts and summary of evidence recognized by the court.