The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (de facto error) lies in the fact that the article of the bus on board used to operate the transportation card terminal and demands the CCTV to be displayed at the D-city bus terminal office in order to comply with the payment of more than 500 won of the bus fee. However, the above office did not interfere with the business of the victim E (hereinafter “victim”).

Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged by misunderstanding the facts.

2. The court below consistently stated that the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the following facts or circumstances acknowledged based on the records as follows: ① the article of the bus shuttletle bus terminal office located in Gyeonggi-si, around 10:10 on November 26, 2012, the defendant sought a refund by asserting that the bus fee was paid by operating the transportation card terminal and demanding a refund; ② the victim was 1:45 minutes at the above office; ② the victim was able to carry out business due to abusive and verbal abuse at the time of the investigation agency and the court below; ② the victim stated consistently that he was unable to carry out business due to the Defendant’s heavy desire and verbal abuse; ③ even if the Defendant’s demand and assertion are justified (the bus fee was paid in excess of 100 won), the crime of interference with business can be established if the means and method are unlawful; and the fact that the defendant interfered with the victim’s accounting affairs as stated in the court below’s criminal facts can be sufficiently acknowledged.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion of mistake is without merit.

3. Accordingly, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is groundless. It is so decided as per Disposition.