The judgment of the court below is reversed.

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

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Erroring facts or misunderstanding of legal principles (1) The Defendant: (a) found the victim’s business obstruction in the television of the victim’s management, and told the customer that he would return to his business suspension; (b) allowed the victim to talk in the information room or parked the vehicle at the entrance of the victim’s televisor parking lot; (c) it is difficult to deem the

Although the court below found the defendant guilty of each charge, the court below erred by misunderstanding the facts or by misunderstanding the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

(2) The embezzlement cannot be deemed as a victim’s ownership of money deposited in the Defendant’s account. The Defendant lent the name of the account to G, but withdrawn money from the Defendant’s account with G’s consent. As such, the Defendant could not be deemed to have embezzled the money of the victim, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged. The lower court erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. In light of the overall circumstances of the instant case of unreasonable sentencing, the sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant (such as a fine of three million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. (1) As to the assertion of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, the term “comfort force” in each business interference with the business refers to all the forces capable of suppressing and mixing a person’s free will. The term “comfort force” refers to neither tangible nor intangible nor intangibles, nor includes pressure by social, economic, political status, and royalty, as well as assault and intimidation, and the victim’s free will is not practically controlled by force.

According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, the victim's wife H is not engaged in business as stated in the judgment of the court below and the customer is under suspension.