The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In regard to interference with the business of December 20, 2014, the Defendant: (a) provided that the Defendant had not expressed a bath to customers or interfered with the victim’s business by avoiding any disturbance, as stated in the facts constituting a crime, at a restaurant operated by the victim D; (b) provided that the Defendant inflicted injury on January 1, 2015; and (c) provided that there was only a fact that the Defendant had sound at the time, and did not inflict an injury on the victim K.

B. The Defendant was in a state of mental disorder or mental disorder due to mental illness and alcohol, such as a sulve disorder, which was previously suffered by the Defendant at the time of committing the instant crime.

C. The sentence of unfair sentencing (eight months of imprisonment) by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below that interference with the business of December 20, 2014, the victim suffered disturbance on December 22, 2014 immediately after the occurrence of the instant case, such as “the defendant satisfed, satisfed, satfed, sat at the restaurant for about one hour, and satisfed.” They called “the customers on the restaurant, satfed, satfed, satfed, sat at the police, and satfed, satched, satched.” On the other hand, the police called “the defendant was fatd at the time of the first dispatch.” The victim satfe at the time of the instant crime, the victim satfe at the time of the Defendant’s act, satfe at the time of the Defendant’s act, and other important parts of the Defendant’s work at the time of the crime.” The court below’s assertion is sufficiently justified in light of the following circumstances.