The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the defendant's appeal grounds (misunderstanding of facts) that the defendant visited the office of the above company because he did not receive wages from D Co., Ltd., but it does not interfere with the victim E's business as stated in the facts charged.

Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case, thereby misunderstanding the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, namely, ① The victim, from the investigative agency to the court of the lower court, found the Defendant in the D office from 10:00 on September 13, 2016 to 13:00 on September 13, 2016, and asked whether the representative director and the defendant is aware of it.

The president started to take a defective bath, and she had a sound to be the president.

In this regard, he was able to take a bath while sitting on the job and return to the office.

On the day, only the situation where preparation and finishing work have been done to leave before the end of the year of the year of the year of the year of the year of the year of the year of the year of the year of the year of the year of the year of the year of the year of the year of the year of the year of the year.

Therefore, the report was made in 112.

“A consistent statement to the effect that the Defendant is consistently stated, ② at the time when the police officer dispatched upon receipt of a report arrives at the site, the Defendant shall give the victim a desire within the office to pay money.

“A large voice” and ③ there are circumstances in which the Defendant was unable to receive construction cost from the representative director of the company.

In full view of the fact that the above company's act of avoiding disturbance and taking a bath for about three hours cannot be seen as a legitimate act that does not go against social norms, the defendant can sufficiently recognize the fact that the defendant interfered with the business of the victim, such as the facts charged.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is just and there are grounds for appeal.