The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. According to the statement of the victim J (hereinafter “victim”) and CCTV images, it is evident that the Defendant’s act interfered with the Defendant’s business of convenience stores, such as: (a) the Defendant collected the guns to be laid in the instant convenience stores as indicated in this part of the facts charged (hereinafter “instant convenience stores”); and (b) expressed a large voice to the customers entering outside the said convenience stores; and (c) expressed a desire to the customers entering outside the said convenience stores, and avoiding disturbance to the degree of trial and arbitration; and (d) the Defendant’s act interfered with the above convenience stores.

Nevertheless, the court below erred in misunderstanding the facts charged against obstruction of business.

B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (three years of suspended execution in two years and six months of imprisonment) is too unhutiled and unfair.

2. Determination

A. 1) In light of the facts and circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, the court below found the defendant not guilty of the charge of interference with business in this part of the judgment of the court below, on the ground that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is insufficient to recognize that the defendant interfered with the victim's convenience store business by force, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this differently. 2) The "defluence" in the crime of interference with business in the judgment of the court below is not charged with obstruction of business in this part. It is not necessary to put a person's free will in any form, form, or form, and in reality, it is not necessary to suppress the victim's free will. However, in light of the offender's status, it should be sufficient to suppress the victim's free will in light of the date and place of the crime, motive, purpose of the crime, number of persons, capacity, mode of duty, type of duty, status of the victim, etc.

Supreme Court Decision 209.9.10