The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,500,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. The decision of the court below on the summary of the grounds for appeal (a fine of 1.5 million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Examination of the judgment on the grounds of appeal by the defendant ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds of appeal by the court below. The records show that the court of appeal requested formal trial on January 3, 2013 on the grounds that the defendant had been absent twice on the date of the second trial but failed to appear at the court under Articles 365 and 458(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and that the defendant was sentenced to a fine of 1,50,000 won, the above judgment became final and conclusive by the lapse of the appeal period, and thereafter, the defendant requested the recovery of appeal against the above judgment, and the fact that the defendant requested the recovery of appeal against the above judgment was recognized as a result of a cause for which the defendant was unable to file an appeal within the statutory period is not responsible for the defendant

Accordingly, the judgment of the court below can no longer be maintained since all the trial proceedings, including the examination of evidence, are newly conducted in the trial.

3. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is reversed ex officio pursuant to Article 364(2) and (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, and the judgment below is reversed and it is again decided as follows.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a person engaged in taxi driving, and the victim B (the 61 year old, the 61 year old) is a person who operates a 'D cafeteria' in the city of Speaker.

1. At around 11:00 on August 27, 2012, the Defendant: (a) 11:00, the Defendant: (b) found drinking in the “D cafeteria” restaurant in the state of drinking, and obstructed the victim’s restaurant business by force by avoiding disturbances within the restaurant, such as “whether she has been engaged in drinking.” (c) whether she was boomed and boomed, and boomed, and she was drinking.” (d) 11:00; and (d) 1:00, the Defendant frighted the victim’s restaurant business.

2. The Defendant is in a state of drinking again at about 19:00 on the same day.