The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts and improper sentencing);

A. At the time stated in the facts charged in the instant case, there was no customer as well as the Defendant at the victim’s restaurant at the time of the time indicated in the instant facts charged, and the Defendant did not interfere with the victim’s business by avoiding disturbance due to the victim’s abusive language or driving the table. However, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine.

B. The punishment sentenced by the court below (the violation of the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act and interference with business) is too unreasonable.

2. In full view of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the lower court’s judgment as to the assertion of mistake of facts and the evidence duly adopted and examined, the lower court’s judgment convicting the Defendant of this part of the facts charged is justifiable, and there is no error of misconception of facts as alleged by the Defendant, on the grounds that it is sufficiently recognized that the Defendant interfered with the victim’s restaurant business by force for about two hours, including: (a) the Defendant takes a bath to the victim as indicated in the facts charged; (b) Doing the victim and the customers by taking the hacks; and (c) the victim and the customers by avoiding the disturbance; and (d) the Defendant

(1) On the date and time stated in the facts charged, the victim reported that the Defendant interfered with the Defendant’s business in a situation where the Defendant remains in the restaurant of this case, and the Defendant dumped the tobacco that the police officer called up would have been asked about whether he interfered with the business, into India, and calculated the tobacco.

내가 뭘 잘못했냐,

Pursuant to whom it was reported;

complaint is filed for a crime without accusation, n.e., acceptance of bribe

“In addition, I tried to go away from the job by referring to Si expenses.”

In addition, the defendant continued to stand in bad attitude with police officers seeking cooperation, and the defendant was arrested in flagrant offenders under the suspicion of interference with business and violation of the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act.

The above time of report, the defendant's seal.