A. In fact, the Defendant, who misleads the Defendant of the fact, committed an act of assaulting the said victim’s body during the process of booming the Defendant’s arms, and did not assault the said victim.

In addition, even though it is possible for a person who purchased an admission ticket on the first floor above the ground to enter the third floor above the ground, a marina society employee prevents the defendant from entering the third floor above the ground, on the ground that the defendant did not purchase an admission ticket above the third floor above the ground. Thus, the defendant's refusal to comply with the above employee's request to leave passively is merely a defense against such unlawful obstruction of entry, and thus, it cannot be deemed that he interfere

Even if the defendant's act constitutes a legitimate act, illegality is excluded.

Nevertheless, the court below convicted all of the facts charged of this case. The court below erred by misapprehending the facts and by misapprehending the legal principles, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court against the Defendant (an amount of KRW 3 million) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the grounds for appeal

A. We examine the judgment of the court below as to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts and legal principles, and consider the following circumstances in light of the circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, the judgment of the court below which convicted all of the facts charged of this case is just and acceptable, and there is no error of misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles as alleged by the defendant.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

According to the CD images taken at the scene at the time of the instant case, the fact that the Defendant displayed the left arms that he did not capture, and when the Defendant her chests of the victim C by drinking the left hand, is clearly known, and even if taking the on-site recording at the time of the instant case, the victim C made a physical contact with the Defendant, even though it was merely a false certificate.