The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of the grounds for appeal (the mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles);

A. At the construction site at the time of the instant case, the Defendant did not interfere with C’s business as a threat of force, such as: (a) there is only a fact that there is a conflict with C; (b) the Defendant was committed against the human father; or (c) the body of C with C having caused his/her emotional disturbance.

B. Since C did not engage in any business at the construction site at the time of the instant case, even if the Defendant had a dispute between C and C, it does not interfere with C’s work.

2. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, C was performing the purification work by reclaiming septic tanks at the construction site at the time of the instant case, but C was responsible for the above construction work at the construction site, and at the time of the instant case, the Defendant took a bath to C and his body as stated in the facts charged (referring to the facts charged revised at the original trial; hereinafter the same shall apply). C’s statement was consistent and concrete with C’s main contents, and it was consistent with C’s statement, and it was consistent with C’s statement. However, C’s statement presented by the court below to the effect that it was not known that the Defendant had expressed his will to human father because it was no yellow situation at the time of the lower court, and that it was sufficiently confirmed that C and C’s statement continued to proceed with the police work at the time of the Defendant’s personal desire and behavior, and that it was sufficiently confirmed that C and C’s statement continued to have been made by the Defendant, who was the police at the time of the lower court’s decision.