The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact-finding, the Defendant merely demanded the victim F to the effect that “the money was stored in a vending machine but not drinking water,” and did not interfere with the business of the victim, and did not assault the victim, such as the victim’s bridge, etc., the lower court found the Defendant guilty of all the charges of this case. The lower court erred by misapprehending the facts, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentencing of the lower court on the grounds that the sentencing of an unreasonable sentencing (a fine of three million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. We examine the argument of mistake of facts. The following circumstances acknowledged by the court below comprehensively based on the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, i.e., ① the victim had consistently avoided disturbance, such as passing the self-satisfing with the Defendant’s satisfing, walking the satfing, walking the satch, etc., ② the defendant also stated that he abused the victim, such as the victim’s fating, walking the satfing, walking the satfing, etc., ② the fact that the victim was obstructed in front of the victim and fatdding the clothes of the victim, as described in the judgment of the court below, can sufficiently recognize the fact that the defendant interfered with the victim’s work as described in the judgment of the court below, and there is no error of law that affected the conclusion

B. It is recognized that the Defendant suffered difficulties in social life due to the following reasons: (a) examining the argument on unfair sentencing; and (b) the Defendant appears to have committed each of the instant crimes due to the symptoms above.

However, it cannot be seen that the defendant denies each of the crimes of this case until the trial of the court, and the defendant was punished several times due to the same crime and suspended execution.