All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

Defendant

A Imprisonment with prison labor for eight months and for one year and ten months respectively.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In the event of the crime of interference with business on December 31, 2015, the Defendant was in a state of mental or physical disability or mental disability at the time of the crime.

B. Error of facts (Defendant J) The Defendant did not have a stone with the victim on December 27, 2015 with a stone. 2) On February 21, 2016, the AI, an employee of the Defendant, was driving a U Poter on February 21, 2016, and the Defendant did not drive the said cargo vehicle.

C. As to the sentence of unfair sentencing [the defendant A (the first instance court: the term of two years of suspended sentence, the probation, the order to attend a lecture, and the second instance court: the term of eight months of imprisonment; the term of two years of suspended sentence; the term of two years of probation; the term of eight months; the term of imprisonment; the term of two years of suspended sentence; the term of one year and ten months; the term of imprisonment in the third instance; the term of three million won; the term of three million won] of the lower court; the defendant A’s second sentence; the defendant J asserted that the sentence of the lower court was too unreasonable; the defendant J appealed that the sentence of the lower court was too unreasonable; while the prosecutor appealed that the sentence of the first, second, and third parties is too unfford and thus the sentence of the lower court is too unfortuned.

2. We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal ex officio, and against the second judgment of the court below of the court below of the defendant J Nos. 3 and 4, the prosecutor filed each appeal against the first, second and third judgment of the court of the court below, and the court decided to concurrently examine the appeal cases against the judgment of the court below. Each of the offenses against the defendants in the judgment of the court below against the defendants is concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act and should be sentenced to a single punishment within the period of punishment increased by concurrent crimes under Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. In this regard, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained.

On the other hand, despite the above reasons for ex officio reversal, the defendant J's defectiveness against the judgment of the court below or the assertion of mistake of fact is still subject to the judgment of this court, and this is examined.

3. Determination of Defendant J’s defectiveness or mental disability.