The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts1) (2016 highest 1505) (2016 highest 1505) Defendant did not threaten the victim C, did not damage the property owned by the victim E, did not interfere with the victim G, and even if he did not interfere with the victim’s work, there was an error of misunderstanding of facts in the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged. (2) (2) (2) Defendant’s act did not constitute an error of misconception of facts, even though it did not constitute a obstruction of business since the Defendant’s act resisted by re-issuance of the passbook under one’s name.

3) (2016고단2142) 피고인이 택시비를 가지고 있었지만 택시기사가 괘씸하여 택시비를 지급하지 않았던 것임에도 이 부분 공소사실을 유죄로 인정한 원심판결에는 사실오인의 위법이 있다. 나. 양형부당 원심판결의 형(징역 8월, 성폭력치료프로그램 이수명령 40시간 은 너무 무거워서 부당하다.

2. Determination

A. 1) In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court’s duly admitted and investigated evidence, the lower court’s judgment that found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged is deemed justifiable. Therefore, the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts is without merit (However, by virtue of Article 25 of the Regulation on Criminal Procedure, the lower court’s ex officio pursuant to Article 25 of the Regulation on Criminal Procedure, “On February 12, 2016,” which is the date of crime No. 3 of the annexed Table 3, the date of crime in the annexed Table 12:0, Feb. 12, 2016.”

(1) The lower court made a confession on this part of the facts charged, and there is no circumstance to suspect the credibility of the confession of the Defendant.

② The victims of special intimidation C, victims E, victims of the crime of causing property damage, victims G, victims of the crime of obstructing official duties, victims J, X, T, U, Q, Q, R,W, Y, and A from the investigative agency are the same as the facts charged in this part of the charges.