The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although the Defendant, in an emergency room, resisted the physician F who refused to give medical treatment with approximately two minutes of resistance, the Defendant did not interfere with emergency medical services.

However, the lower court determined that the Defendant interfered with emergency medical services.

As such, the court below erred by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. Although the Defendant’s act constitutes a justifiable act as to refusal of medical treatment, the lower court convicted the Defendant of the facts charged in the instant case. In so determining, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on justifiable act, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

(c)

The punishment of the court below (one million won) which is unfair in sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence of the judgment below, the court below found the defendant's wife E complained of the difficulty in learning and pulmon and sent back to the D emergency room. The doctor F was the first diagnosis of E and re-verification of the emergency department, and then blood test and CT photograph must be conducted to E. However, while there was a dispute between the defendant and E, the defendant and E were only able to have an excessive treatment, and there was a disturbance in the emergency room by using the abusive and verbal abuse that the defendant argued for excessive treatment to F. And the doctor F was within the emergency room and the defendant was sent out of the emergency room, but it was reported to the police. The above act by the defendant was sufficient to recognize that the above act by the defendant F exceeded the mere level of medical treatment and exceeded the level of interference with emergency medical treatment, so it is sufficient to find the defendant guilty according to each evidence of this case.

2) The following circumstances are acknowledged based on the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, according to the court below’s reasoning.