The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of the facts and the legal principles) is as follows: (a) the victim was finally removed from the office of a pastor on June 21, 2017; and (b) the right to deliver a worship in the distribution of the worship of Daegu D church is not granted; (c) there is no constituting the elements for the crime of obstructing the worship of worship; and (d) it does not interfere with the worship because the worship

Even if it is a family worship, the defendant is a manager of the facility for the distribution of the D church, and is obligated to prevent intrusion to deliver the worship by an unqualified person, and therefore the defendant's act constitutes a justifiable act.

2. Determination

A. Since interference with worship under Article 158 of the Criminal Act’s legal doctrine is a legal interest to protect the peace and religion of the general public, it is established when the defendant’s act constitutes a interference with worship, and it is difficult to see that the defendant’s act interfering with worship is a legitimate act, and it is not reasonable to see the means and method of interference, and there is no urgent circumstance or supplementary nature to acknowledge that the defendant’s act interfered with worship was an emergency or supplementary nature only with worship, in light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

1) The C church is a church with “M” located in Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan City L, and has 61 wedding payments across the country.

2) G was performing duties as the sole supervisor of a church since its establishment in 1969 until 2012, and retired from the position of a church as of January 1, 2013, and N, G from that time.