The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The sentence of sentence against the defendant shall be suspended.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although there is no intention to obstruct the defendant's business, or the defendant's act constitutes self-defense or self-help, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one million won by fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The lower court asserted that the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts, political party act, and self-help is the same as the grounds for appeal. However, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the charges of this case by comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly admitted and examined, and rejected the Defendant’s aforementioned assertion on the grounds of detailed reasons under the title “determination on the Defendant and his defense counsel’s assertion.” In addition, the lower court acknowledged the following circumstances as follows: (a) around 18:00, prior to and after February 13, 2012, the Defendant set up a vehicle at the entrance of this case and set up a protest against the issue of disposal of the goods alleged to be owned by the Defendant by the victim’s employees; (b) around 19:00, the police at around 19:00, demanded the Defendant to move the vehicle to the Defendant several times, and followed the Defendant’s mobilization, thereby obstructing the Defendant’s access to the site office of the victim through the entrance of this case, thereby obstructing the victim’s free access by the victim’s employees.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

B. Although the Defendant denies the instant crime until the trial is held, the Defendant’s judgment on the assertion of unfair sentencing is against it.