The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds of appeal is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts, and thereby adversely affected the conclusion of the judgment, although the Defendant did not have any sound as stated in the facts charged in this case or had his customer and his employees out of the facility, and thus, did not interfere with the business.

2. The lower court rejected the Defendant and the defense counsel’s assertion and its determination in detail under the title of the “determination on the Defendant and the defense counsel’s assertion” in the lower judgment, on the grounds that the Defendant and the defense counsel asserted the same as the grounds for appeal of this case.

According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the above fact-finding and judgment of the court below are just and acceptable. In the process of dispute over the commencement of the business in the car page where the victim commenced the business without his/her consent as stated in the facts charged in this case, it is sufficiently recognized that the defendant interfered with the business of the car page by force by doing acts such as leaving the car page staff, leaving the car page, drinking the customers who want to kill the bread, etc.

Therefore, the judgment below did not err by mistake of facts as alleged by the defendant, and the defendant's assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.