The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In light of the following circumstances, the court below found the defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged, and there is an error of law by misunderstanding facts or by misunderstanding legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment, since the defendant did not interfere with the victim's representative meeting's work jointly with D.

(1) There is no fact that a defendant has interfered with business with D through functional control over his/her conduct as a joint processing doctor.

(2) At the time, the Defendant demanded that the Defendant be present at the meeting as an defective association’s auditor to interfere with the Defendant’s attending the meeting and to unlawfully interfere with the Defendant’s attending the meeting, even though the Defendant expressed his/her intent to be present at the meeting by using a loudspeaker, it does not constitute a threat of interference with the business as an auditor, and there was no intention to interfere with the Defendant’s progress.

B. In light of the overall sentencing conditions of the instant case, the lower court’s punishment (fine of KRW 700,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) Determination of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles as to whether the defendant jointly exercised a power, or whether the defendant jointly made a similar assertion in the lower court’s judgment. Accordingly, according to evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court, the lower court discussed that ① many persons, including D, have taken the blicket or banner stating “I,” and “I, in the general meeting of risk contracts for re-transfer, I am against the disturbance while making an objection to the disturbance outside of the meeting place.” The Defendant was in the meeting place separately from those, ② the Defendant was in the meeting place, ② the Defendant’s act of this case in advance with D.