The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of 300,000 won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In the facts charged in the judgment of the court below, the defendant recognized the crime of interference with business among the facts charged in the judgment of the court below. However, the defendant did not have any arms of the victim E for the crime of assault, and only did he spread the arms of the victim passively, and did not assault the victim.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (the fine of KRW 500,000) is too unreasonable.

2. The Defendant consistently denies the lower court’s determination of the mistake of facts as to the assaulting act from the investigative agency to the court of the lower court. However, the lower court recognized the fact that the victim’s grandchildren was inflicted, and recognized the fact that the victim’s arms were drawn up in the court of the lower court, and denied the fact that the victim’s arms were put in as stated in the summary of the grounds for appeal.

In regard to this, the victim stated in the investigative agency that “the Defendant got back to the lower court, and she saw the lower (victim) to go back twice again, and her fluenites. The Defendant was in his/her own hands and her position once in his/her own hands.” The Defendant stated that “The Defendant was in his/her own hands in his/her own hands, and her hand to get back the Defendant who intends to be fluent, but the Defendant got out of his/her hand, and the Defendant was in his/her own hands in his/her own hands and was tightly sealed.”

On the other hand, according to the face-to-face file of assault No. 3 of the video CD in which H had taken the scene on the day of the instant case, it can be confirmed that the victim was used on the ground floor while the victim got sound, and the defendant was able to enter the victim's arms. However, since the front part of the video is compilation, it is impossible to confirm the specific face-to-face of assault, and the original before editing cannot be confirmed.

The following circumstances revealed by the above circumstances and the record, i.e., the victim, in relation to the transfer theory stated in the facts charged, shall be the Defendant of the Bupyeong-gu Office.