The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In order to use free telephones on the date stated in the facts constituting a crime in the judgment of the court below, the defendant of mistake of facts did not interfere with the victim's work by force due to the threat of the victim's employees, such as the victim C, and smoking at that place.

B. The lower court’s sentence of an unreasonable sentencing (a fine of KRW 3.5 million) imposed on the Defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined in the court below's erroneous determination of facts, as stated in the facts constituting the crime in the judgment of the court below, the defendant expressed the victim C et al. working on the first floor of KT clean storage company with a large interest of his employees, and sufficiently recognized the fact that the defendant interfered with the victim's business by avoiding disturbance due to a power of about 30 minutes by smoking. Thus, the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts is without merit.

B. Although it is difficult to see that the degree of force imposed by the defendant on the victim, etc. and the degree of damage inflicted on the victim, etc. is very serious, the defendant is an elderly elderly living alone, and living conditions are very difficult, and the defendant's crime of this case is concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act with the injury crime for which judgment has already become final and conclusive, and the defendant's crime of this case cannot be considered as concurrent crimes under Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act, and there are favorable circumstances for the defendant. However, the court below seems to have sentenced a fine of KRW 3.5 million reduced to a fine of KRW 5 million under the summary order, considering all favorable circumstances for the defendant, considering all the above favorable circumstances for the defendant, it is difficult to see that the defendant denies the crime of this case to the trial, and it is difficult to see that the error is divided, and the defendant is already imprisonment with prison labor and several times for the same kind of crime.