The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

There is no misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles that the Defendant used the victim F as stated in paragraph (1) of the facts charged in the judgment of the court below. ② Since the date stated in Paragraph (2) of the facts charged in the judgment of the court below only used the victim G loss, the injury suffered by the victim G does not have causation with the Defendant’s act, and it cannot be viewed as an injury under the Criminal Act, and ③ even if it is acknowledged that the Defendant inflicted an injury as stated in the facts charged in the judgment of the court below, it is inevitable in the process of the Defendant’s defense or legitimate act in opposition against the act of interference with business, and thus, the illegality should be avoided. However, the judgment of the court below which convicted the Defendant of the facts charged in the case,

The sentence of the court below on unreasonable sentencing (the fine of 500,000 won) is too unreasonable.

Judgment

In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, namely, ① the victim F was consistent in the investigative agency and the lower court court court court’s determination that “at the time of the instant case, members of the D shop including the Defendant (hereinafter “instant commercial building”) invadedd the underground mechanical room of the commercial building without permission, and the Defendant taken the front door of the shop, and the part, such as the shoulder side in which the Defendant wishes to enter the mechanical room, was able to believe it on one occasion in light of the body and consistency of the statement itself, and the developments leading up to and after the statement.” In full view of the following circumstances, the victim F’s statement is consistent with the victim F’s statement, i.e., the images of the CCTV screen installed in the mechanical room of this case are consistent with the above statements by the victim F.