All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendants A and D’s obstruction of worship 1) prevented the Defendants from getting up to the lecture room, and I was in the presence of the H church at the time.

Since the L Union received a disposition of dismissal from a H church's holding as a member of the H church, the worship that he/she tried to proceed cannot be deemed as a worship protected by the obstruction of worship, and the Defendants' act does not constitute the elements for the obstruction of worship.

Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2) Even if the worship of family I’s worship is a worship protected by the obstruction of worship, the Defendants had already been discharged from the position of a pastor and there is sufficient reason to believe that I is not entitled to proceed with worship at H church, and his act constitutes a justifiable act stipulated in Article 20 of the Criminal Act. The judgment of the court below is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. Defendants A, B, and C’s interference with their duties and legal principles are not unilaterally set off the entrance door of a church, but all Defendants and I cannot see vessels from the church in order to avoid physical collisions. The I prevents the Defendants from entering the church with three compact system, and the Defendants prevent the Defendants from entering the church on the part of I with the bicycle lock.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found this part of the facts charged guilty is erroneous by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the judgment.

2) At the time of embezzlement, etc., I did not go through the suspicion of embezzlement, etc., and the Defendants’ locking the entrance of the church constitutes a justifiable act to prevent the Defendants from taking out the accounting-related documents, etc. on the part of I.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below convicting this part of the facts charged is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles, which affected the judgment.

(c)

Sentencing is unfair.