The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

가. 사실오인 피고인은 평택시 E건물 내 이 사건 F사우나에서 때밀이로 일하고 있는데, 위 건물을 관리하는 G와 D가 피고인을 이 사건 F사우나에서 �아내려고 부당하게 대우하였을 뿐 피고인은 공소사실 기재와 같이 피해자 G의 마트 영업업무를 방해한 적이 없으므로 원심판결을 인정할 수 없다.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (a fine of KRW 700,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Comprehensively taking account of the statements from the investigative agency of G, H and I to the court of the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts, the defendant found the victim G in the Mart Round around November 19, 2013, and the victim found the victim G in the Mart Round and expressed a large amount of 19:40 on November 19, 2013, and sufficiently recognized the fact that the defendant avoided the disturbance for more than 20 minutes (the defendant is also the person who has avoided the disturbance with a large interest at that time). Accordingly, this part of the defendant's assertion is rejected.

B. In full view of the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant’s assertion of unreasonable sentencing does not recognize any error; (b) it is difficult to find out the strong reflectivity of the Defendant’s criticism on the victim, etc.; (c) the victim still wishes to punish the Defendant; and (d) the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, family environment, and circumstances before and after the commission of the crime, the lower court’s punishment does not seem to be unreasonable; and thus,

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.