Defendant

All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) was set up a car at the entrance of the parking lot for the crime of interference with business in Article 1 of the judgment of misunderstanding of facts (Defendant 1) and did not interfere with business since the driver was parked in another parking area immediately, and the driver did not instruct the Defendant to move the two containers to another parking area.

B) The purpose of blocking vehicles entering the entrance of the parking lot for interference with business in Article 2 of the holding is to stop using the entrance and exit which was not the main entrance and exit but the main entrance and exit did not interfere with the business since the use was smooth, and the main entrance and exit did not interfere with the business, and the fact that two container boxes were moved to the parking lot to the parking lot was already moved by the interference with business in Article 1 of the holding, and the defendant did not participate in the business in Article 3 of the decision on interference with business.

With respect to the crime of interference with business under section 3(b) of the judgment, preventing the entrance door of the parking lot with locks was not interfered with as it was intended to stop the use of the entrance and exit without permission.

In relation to the crime of interference with business under subsection (1) of this Article, the driver's parking of the vehicle in the entrance of the parking lot was not known to the defendant, but not directed to the defendant.

2) The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (one year of suspended sentence in six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable and unfair. (b) The prosecutor 1) the mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles (not guilty part) whether the knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife