The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although the Defendant, as stated in the judgment of the court below, did not have a hummatic expression as stated in the judgment of the court below and did not have an intention to obstruct business, the court below convicted the Defendant of the facts charged in this case. The court below

B. The sentencing of the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances, which were duly adopted and examined by the lower court regarding the assertion of misunderstanding of facts, i.e., whether the victim had consistently found in the Health Device Experience Office operated by the victim over this title and sold “hys and effects without any dynasium or effects,” in accordance with the consistent provisions from the investigative agency to the court of the lower court.

In light of the facts stated in the judgment of the court below, the defendant's aforementioned assertion is without merit, since the defendant used the term "a person who was under medical device experience room" and used the term "a person who was under medical care for the victim" and "a person who was under medical care for the victim" and "a person who was under medical care for the victim," and stated that the customer "a person who was under medical care for the victim," "a person who was under the victim's health care room" and "a person who was under the victim's health care for the victim's health room operation." In light of the fact that the defendant stated in the judgment of the court below, it is possible to fully recognize the fact that the defendant interfered with the victim's health room operation.

B. It is recognized that the Defendant did not have any specific criminal history, in addition to the one-time suspended sentence.

However, considering the following factors: (a) the Defendant did not agree with the victim up to the time of the trial; (b) the sentence is not limited to one time; (c) the Defendant’s age, sex and environment; (d) the motive, means and consequence of the crime; and (e) the conditions of sentencing specified in the instant pleadings, such as the circumstances after the crime, are too unreasonable.