The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although there were the same reasons under the misunderstanding of facts, the judgment of the first instance, which rendered a guilty verdict against the defendant, has committed an unlawful act that affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding the facts.

1) As to the crime of injury, the Defendant: (a) was scambling the left hand to prevent the victim; (b) in such a case, the Defendant’s left hand contacted the victim’s part below the victim’s title, and (c) did not either scam the part of the victim’s neck or blue.

2) Regarding interference with business, there is no fact that the Defendant interfered with the business of the victim while leaving the store or returning to the store.

Rather, whether the injured person was the Defendant and why is the victim’s “;”

B. In the wind of "this ring," only two persons, including foreign customers who had been in the store at the time, have been placed in the store.

B. The punishment sentenced by the first instance court (the penalty amounting to KRW 1,500,00) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the first instance court in the judgment on the assertion of facts, namely, ① the testimony of a person who has observed or experienced the scene of the crime cannot be rejected without any reasonable ground. The victim E, in the court of first instance, sent the Defendant’s bath first while continuing to do so. The victim E, in response to the following: “I am able to see, if I am me, and I am me by her hand, followed the Defendant’s her seat. I am her flick with the flick flick, etc., again again after I am flick.” “The Defendant returned to the store on June 10, 2015, while I am she continued to do so in the court of first instance, I am her playing in the court of first instance.”