The Defendant, with the permission of the I who is the owner of the instant Section, set the door door, entered the necessary bonds, and did not have any fact leading to the said Section.

Victim D is only illegal possession of the above section.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty is erroneous by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the judgment.

2. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, I, which was a widely known transferee of the instant Section, was the fact that around November 201, 2013, transferred the right to operate the instant Section and real estate to the victim D in KRW 300 million, and was in charge of managing and operating Section since that time, the victim incurred various expenses related to the operation of Section from that time to that time, etc.

According to the above facts, the defendant's assertion is without merit, since he can sufficiently recognize that the defendant interfered with the business of the victim by force and infringed upon the company bond, which is a structure.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.