The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. As to the Defendant’s refusal to withdraw and special intimidation among the facts charged in the instant case, the victim’s son was in the victim’s house in order to bring the victim’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s cell phone from February 2016 to bring them back again. At the time, the victim did not demand the eviction, and there was no fact that the Defendant used knife and threatened the victim.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (one hundred months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court and the first instance court as to the assertion of mistake of fact, and the following circumstances, namely, ① immediately after the instant crime was committed, the victim’s “the Defendant is dead,” and the knife is found.

“The Defendant did not make a false statement about the content of 112 reported to the police officer, 112, knife the knife to the police officer, and knife the police officer, 2) the victim made a consistent and detailed statement about the instant crime, 3) the Defendant did not make a statement to the victim’s home to find a sexual intercourse brought by M in the investigative agency, 3) the Defendant did not make a statement to the effect that M took place at the court, and M took the cellular phone of the Defendant.

There is no circumstance to see that M has taken place a mobile phone, and M has taken to the home of the victim by finding it after the month of bringing the mobile phone.

In light of the fact that the defendant's refusal to leave this case and the crime of special intimidation are sufficiently recognized, this part of the defendant's assertion is rejected.

B. The fact that the defendant recognized the crime of interference with and injury to the business of the defendant and the victims did not want the punishment of the defendant, etc.