All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendants acted as stated in the facts charged.

However, the defendants should leave

The Gu's place is the place where customers freely use it, and the defendants visit the place to purchase the mobile phone profit, so the crime of refusing to leave is not established.

2. The lower court acknowledged the following circumstances based on the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, namely, ① the Defendants did not leave about 40 minutes of the date and time indicated in the facts charged in the instant case, despite the victim’s demand for eviction continued at a place, and ② at the time, the Defendants held two separate diskettes in the name of “Masung Electronic Service Branch,” and the contents of which criticizes “Masung Electronic Labor Policy and Consumer Policy,” and ③ the Defendants visited at a place to purchase mobile phone scams, but there is a change in the purport that the Defendants visited the Defendants to purchase the cell phone scams, but it is difficult for the Defendants at the time to believe the above change in light of the fact that the Defendants did not sell the cell phone scams, but did not have any waiting space to receive the service, and that the Defendants possessed the above scams. (4) At that time, the Defendants appears to have visited the instant business point in view of the content of the scams.

Even if the above act itself causes a disturbance beyond the ordinary purpose of access to the business store and actually undermines the peace of the victim, the act of the victim demanding the evacuation of the defendants in order to resolve such disturbance is lawful, and the act of the defendants who do not comply with such demand constitutes a crime of non-compliance with the eviction.

3. Thus, the defendants' appeal is justified.