The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, in collusion with A and C, did not interfere with the operation of the victim’s private teaching institute. However, in order to confirm the site after selling some of his stores located in the H shopping mall located in Seo-gu, Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-gu, G to A and C, the Defendant was found guilty of the facts charged in the instant case. However, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal doctrine, which affected the conclusion of the judgment

B. The sentence of a fine of KRW 700,000 imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the following facts can be acknowledged. (A) The Defendant’s wife L, holding Nos. 201, 202, 206, 216, and 235 of the second H shopping mall’s two floors, which was the head of the management office of the said H shopping mall, granted the right of representation on May 25, 2009 to enter into a lease agreement with the said store.

(B) On June 2, 2010, the victim, who was delegated by L, etc., entered into a contract with L on February 28, 2011, under which the Defendant, on behalf of L, leased the entire H shopping mall 2 floor including L, with the deposit amount of KRW 20 million from June 20, 2010 to June 20, 2015 (the date of investigation record No. 68 pages), and from September 20, 2010, the Defendant, who was acting for L, received from L, KRW 18 million from L, etc., and gave up his/her right to claim rent for his/her store.

(No. 49) The Defendant, on behalf of L, sold to C the above 201, 216, 235, and 202 shares on behalf of L, and 1/2 shares of the above 206 (No. 109 or 129 of the Investigation Records) A, and C, after the above sales contract, sold to A one-half shares of the above 206 (No. 109 or 129 of the Investigation Records). Since then, the Defendant entered into a contract with I with L, etc., a sales store.