All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal by the defense counsel is against the defendants' mistake while recognizing the facts of the crime. The defendants actually held a claim for construction work at the site of the new construction of the Korea Development Institute of the Korea Development Institute of the Korea Development Institute of the Korea Development Institute of the Korea Development Institute and exercised the right of retention. However, due to health or economic circumstances, they were forced to leave the site without any choice but have lost the right of retention. The defendants all of the defendants did not have any profit acquired by the crime of this case and rather have a big economic difficulty because they did not receive construction work, and the defendants C did not have any history of punishment for the same crime as the disabled in the second degree of the disability and there was no history of criminal punishment, and the defendants D did not have any history of criminal punishment. In light of the above, each of the court below's punishment against the defendants C is unfair.

2. The crime of this case was committed by the Defendants who did not possess the above building and thereby did not hold the above right of retention, thereby obstructing an auction by filing a false report of the right of retention in the auction procedure for the above building. This is not only detrimental to the fairness of the auction procedure, but also, it is not good to commit the crime that may delay the auction procedure by bringing a dispute over the existence of the right of retention or a waiver of a request for purchase, and cause considerable damage to interested parties, such as creditors, etc. by lowering the sale price. The crime of this case is not committed. The crime of this case was committed by the case No. 1, which applied for voluntary auction against the above building, and the procedure of the above auction is likely to be delayed for a considerable period of time due to disputes over the existence of the right of retention reported by the Defendants, such as filing a lawsuit for confirmation of the absence of the right of retention against the Defendants. The circumstances asserted by