The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is as follows: (a) the Defendant was trying to visit the TRI photographer in the chests, etc. after shooting the TRI at the New Village Syna Hospital; and (b) did not interfere with the Defendant’s treatment business by leaving the TRI photographer in a large voice, etc.; and (c) the Defendant was 112 calls before the MOI room to help a police officer, and thus, the Defendant’s act does not constitute a force sufficient to suppress the hospital’s free will (the grounds for appeal by the Defendant’s defense counsel submitted after the lapse of the period for appeal). 2) In full view of the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court, the Defendant did not enter the MOI room without permission prior to the TRI room in the YI room in the second degree, and thus, the Defendant’s act does not constitute a force sufficient to suppress the hospital’s free will (to the extent of supplement the grounds for appeal stated in the reasons for appeal).

On the other hand, the Defendant’s act could be recognized that there was a delay in the schedule of MFI photographs due to the Defendant’s act, and the Defendant interfered with the duty of care of Sscickers in the 112th century by force, on the other hand, even though the police officer was requested to leave the Defendant, and the police officer was thereafter requested to dispatch another police officer to the Defendant until he was arrested as a current offender.

It is reasonable to view it.

3. Accordingly, the Defendant’s appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is groundless.