The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. The appellant against the Defendant’s appeal shall submit a written reason for appeal to the appellate court within 20 days from the date of receipt of the records of trial (Article 361-3(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act). According to the records, the Defendant submitted a petition of appeal not stating the reason for appeal on February 12, 2018, which was within seven days from February 8, 2018, the judgment of the lower court was rendered, but the Defendant was notified of the receipt of the records of trial on March 6, 2018, but failed to submit a written reason for appeal within the period for submission of the legitimate reason for appeal. The petition of appeal does not include the reasons for appeal in the petition of appeal, nor does it find any reason for ex officio investigation otherwise.

Therefore, pursuant to Article 361-4(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, an appeal by a defendant shall be dismissed by decision. However, as long as the judgment of the court below is reversed in entirety by the prosecutor's appeal and a new judgment is rendered after pleading, a separate decision to dismiss an appeal by a defendant shall not be made.

2. Judgment on the prosecutor's appeal

A. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts and legal principles) ① According to the lease agreement, the victim leased from the Defendant the entire building located in Hongcheon-gun, Hongcheon-gun, Seoul (hereinafter “instant building”). Since the victim and the Defendant were in dispute in relation to the lease of the instant building, the Defendant’s entry into the instant building is contrary to the presumption intention of the victim, and ② the Defendant used part of the first floor and the second floor of the building.

It is difficult to see that there is no authority to enter the 1st floor entrance of the building, and ③ the defendant intrudes into the victim’s office beyond the 1st floor entrance of the building, and this is also alleged in the facts charged of obstruction of business which the court below found guilty. In full view of the above, the court below which acquitted the defendant about the violation of the facts and legal principles.