A. Although the Defendant had avoided a disturbance of about 20 to 30 minutes, the Defendant did not interfere with his/her business for a longer time, such as the entries in the facts charged.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing is heavy.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly examined and adopted by the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts, it is sufficiently recognized that the defendant interfered with the victim's business by avoiding disturbance as stated in each criminal facts in the judgment below.

B. Considering the various sentencing conditions indicated in the records on the assertion of unfair sentencing, the lower court’s punishment may not be deemed heavy even if considering all the circumstances asserted by the Defendant as the grounds for appeal, such as the circumstance in which the victim of interference with business already agreed at the lower court submitted a written agreement to this court.

3. Conclusion, Defendant’s appeal cannot be accepted.