All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The punishment sentenced by the court below (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The above sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below is too uneasible and unfair.

2. It is recognized that the defendant shows an attitude against his or her will while recognizing his or her mistake.

Meanwhile, there are three penalties for the Defendant due to the violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) and five times of punishment for the crime of interference with business. Among them, the three times of punishment is imprisonment with prison labor; the Defendant was driving under the influence of the Defendant during the period of repeated crime; the blood alcohol concentration level is 0.184%; the Defendant committed the instant crime of interference with business without being familiar with the Defendant even after the Defendant was prosecuted for drinking; the Defendant did not have any special change in circumstances to change the sentence after the judgment of the court below; and the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, environment, motive and circumstance of the crime, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc. are examined, it is not recognized that the sentence imposed by the court below is reasonable and it exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion because it is too heavy or too heavy.

3. According to the conclusion, the appeal filed by the defendant and the prosecutor are all groundless, and they are dismissed pursuant to Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. However, since it is obvious that the " July 19, 2006" in Part 13 of the judgment of the court below is a clerical error of " July 10, 2006", it is corrected to correct it pursuant to Article 25 of the Rules on Criminal Procedure.