The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. (1) As to the crime No. 1-A among the criminal facts stated in the lower judgment’s judgment (defensive assault on November 201, 2012), the Defendant did not commit any assault against the victim, and even if there was a domestic assault, the period is not a lower police officer on November 201, 201, but a lower police officer on April 201 or May 201.

(2) As to the crime described in Article 1-2(b) of the judgment of the court below (the mid-term violence on August 2013), the Defendant only carried the victim’s head several times, and the Defendant did not look at the head’s body with the hand floor, and the head’s body was also a justifiable act that does not violate the social rules in light of the situation at the time.

(3) As to the crime described in Article 2-2(b) of the holding of the lower judgment (the injury inflicted on July 2, 2014), the Defendant only attached the victim’s rear side, did not have the victim’s head debt, and did not have the intent of assault.

(4) As to the crime listed in paragraph (3) of the lower judgment’s holding (Interference with the business of May 17, 2014), no person who is the name of “F” or “F” in the “F office,” and the name of “F” is either the injured party or the actual business owner, and the said office’s operation cannot be deemed the victim’s business, and thus, it does not constitute a crime of interference with business even with tearing.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below that found all of the facts charged of this case guilty is erroneous and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (an amount of KRW 3 million) is too unreasonable.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for an ex officio appeal, the Prosecutor applied for the amendment to the indictment with the content that “at the house of the Defendant, 106 Da 2002, Dong 1002, Dong 305, Dong 304, Dong 305, Dong 404, Dong 305, Dong 304, Dong 305, Dong 307, Dong 307,” before the judgment on the grounds for an ex officio appeal. This part and the remaining criminal facts were modified by this court’s permission.