The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., both types of crimes in question) is too unreasonable, taking into account the following circumstances: (i) the Defendant was found to have become a party in the trial, all of the crimes in this case are recognized and reflected; (ii) the amount of defraudation is minor; and (iii) the Defendant is able to refrain from drinking and live faithfully in the future.

2. Considering the circumstances asserted by the Defendant, each of the crimes of this case is likely to obstruct restaurant business by taking advantage of the following facts: (i) the Defendant had 112 reported and expressed an desire to improve a restaurant business; (ii) the nature of the crime is very poor in light of the circumstances and the content of the crime; (iii) there is a record of criminal punishment more than 20 times for repeatedly committing violent crimes except for six instances of obstruction of business operation, five instances of obstruction of performance of official duties, and two instances of fraud; and (iv) each of the crimes of this case appears to have been committed during the period of repeated crimes; (iii) the Defendant has committed repeated crimes; (iv) even though it appears that many of them were committed after drinking, and there were no efforts to improve their drinking habits or habits; and (v) the Defendant has been able to commit these crimes beyond the reasonable scope of punishment by taking into account the following factors: (v) whether the Defendant has been subject to punishment, such as assault and insult, and whether the Defendant has been subject to punishment within the detention house or its genuine means and conditions.

3. Conclusion.