The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In relation to the crime of interference with the business of this case by mistake of facts, since the other party who was the defendant's desire at the time is not a "patient who was drinking," but a "dactor", it cannot be deemed that the victim I interfere with the operation of the victim I's head office.

Nevertheless, the court below convicted the defendant of the above crime, which is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. At the time of each of the instant crimes, the Defendant was suffering from mental illness as a person with mental disability of Grade II, and thus, was in a state of mental disability.

C. The sentence imposed by the lower court (two years and two months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below and the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts, at the time of the defendant's hography operated by the victim I, he saw the disturbance and behavior failure, such as the obstruction of business as shown in the judgment of the court below, the victim and other customers, and the victim and other customers, and thereby, he saw the fact that the hographs go out of the room.

Even if the Defendant, at the time of home, expressed a desire against the above victim, who is the head of the office, the Defendant’s disturbance and the degree of his failure, clearly constitute “defluence” as referred to in the Criminal Act in the crime of interference with business, and thus, the establishment of this crime has no influence.

I would like to say.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's argument is without merit.

B. As to the assertion of mental disability, it is true that the defendant had been treated as a mental illness in the past according to the records of this case. However, in light of various circumstances revealed in the records, such as the course and process of the crime in this case, the defendant's mental capacity at the time of each of the crimes in this case.