The appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor shall be dismissed, respectively.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) The lower court found Defendant guilty on the ground that the Defendant did not interfere with or assault the instant business and did not associate with his/her memory.

2) The lower court’s sentence (10 months of imprisonment) against an unfair defendant in sentencing is too unreasonable.

B. The lower court’s sentence against the Defendant by the Prosecutor (ten months of imprisonment) is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below as to the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts, in light of the following facts: although the defendant is found to have drinking alcohol at the time of the crime of this case, it can be sufficiently recognized that the defendant interfered with or abused each victim's duties in light of the fact that the victim's statement is specific and consistent in the main part of the crime of this case, and there is no reasonable ground to deny the defendant's memory or there is no fact-finding in light of the circumstances leading to the crime of this case, etc.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of facts is without merit.

B. We also examine both the defendant and prosecutor's argument of unfair sentencing as to the defendant and prosecutor's argument of sentencing.

Considering the fact that each of the crimes committed by the Defendant, committed by the Defendant, obstructs the work of neighboring commercial buildings, and the nature of the crime is not less severe in light of its content, frequency, method, etc., the Defendant has been subject to criminal punishment, such as the number of fines due to violence, the suspension of execution two times, the treatment and custody one time, and the possibility of recidivism due to violent inclinations caused by the Defendant’s dynamic disorder both at the same time and at the same time, it is inevitable to sentence the Defendant.

However, the defendant suffers from mental illness, and each of the crimes of this case has the ability to discern things due to the above mental disorder.