The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of the legal principles) is as follows: (a) at the time of the instant case, the Defendant resisted the victim D to the termination of the game itself; and (b) did not take the victim’s motive or care of the victim’s chest.

Therefore, since the defendant did not exercise the power to the extent of interference with the business, there was no intention to interfere with the business, the defendant does not constitute a crime of interference with the business.

2. Determination:

A. The term “power of force” of the crime of interference with the legal doctrine refers to all the forces that may suppress and confuse a person’s free will. As such, violence, intimidation as well as social, economic, political status and pressure based on the right, etc. are not required to be practically controlled by the victim’s free will. However, in light of the offender’s status, number of persons and surrounding circumstances, etc., it refers to the force sufficient to suppress the victim’s free will. As such, whether the act of force constitutes a crime ought to be objectively determined by taking into account all the circumstances, such as the date and time and place of crime, motive and purpose of crime, number of persons, capacity, type of work, and status of the victim, etc. (see Supreme Court Decision 2009Do5732, Sept. 10, 209). Moreover, in light of the aforementioned legal doctrine, it is sufficient that the Defendant’s act of interference with the appellate court’s business was not likely to actually cause interference with the business of the Defendant, and the act of the Defendant’s interference with the business can be duly established.

Therefore, the defendant's mistake of facts and legal principles are erroneous.