The part concerning the crime No. 1-A of the judgment of the court of first instance and the judgment of the court of second instance shall be reversed, respectively.

The defendant is judged in the first instance court.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. As to Defendant 1’s misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, among the judgment of the court below 2, Defendant 1’s thief on June 1, 2015 and larceny on June 11, 2015, the court below which found Defendant guilty, in the absence of a theft of goods as stated in the facts charged, erred by misapprehending the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

Of the lower judgment on July 3, 2015, with respect to interference with business affairs on July 3, 2015, since the victim did not engage in business affairs of the virtue store, this does not constitute “business affairs” of the crime of interference with business affairs, and since the Defendant only visited the above sales store once, the Defendant did not interfere with business affairs on more than 15:0 and more than two occasions as stated in the lower judgment, and there was no interference with business affairs on more than 15:0 and more than 17:00, as stated in the lower judgment, and around July 3, 2015, and the interference with business affairs on or around July 25, 2015, the Defendant’s act does not constitute “power of force” of interference with business affairs.

Nevertheless, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, which found the defendant guilty, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2) The sentence sentenced by the court below to the defendant (the first instance judgment: the fine of KRW 2 million, the second instance judgment: the fine of KRW 100,000, the second instance judgment: the fine of KRW 500,000, the fine of KRW 100,000 for the remaining crimes) is too unreasonable.

(b)the sentence sentenced to the Defendant by the second instance judgment of the Prosecutor is too unhued and unreasonable;

2. Determination

A. 1) An ex officio decision on the grounds for appeal is rendered ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal, the first and second judgments are rendered against the Defendant, and the Defendant filed an appeal against the second and the second judgment. The Prosecutor decided to jointly deliberate on the two cases, and the court rendered a decision to jointly deliberate on each of the crimes in the first and second judgment against the Defendant, and the first-Ga of the second judgment in the second and second judgment against the Defendant. The crime is a concurrent crime under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and thus, one sentence should be imposed pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. Thus, the first and the second judgment of the court below.