2. The judgment of the Defendant committed the instant crime without being aware of the fact that the Defendant committed a separate crime of assault and fraud during the period of repeated crime, and was punished by a fine, and that the Defendant did not cooperate in the trial proceedings, such as hiding the enemy while the trial is in progress, is disadvantageous to the Defendant.

On the other hand, it seems that the crime of obstruction of business, injury, and damage to property is not serious, the defendant's illegal use of the E's resident registration number and forgery of the E's signature, but it was voluntarily corrected during the investigation process, and the above victim did not want the punishment of the defendant under an agreement with the victim C, etc. are favorable to the defendant.

In addition, the Defendant’s assertion is not acceptable on the grounds that the sentence of the lower court is too unreasonable, comprehensively taking account of the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, family environment, motive and background of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime.

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the conclusion is groundless.