The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The decision of the court below on the summary of the grounds for appeal (7 million won in penalty) is too unreasonable.

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance trial, and the sentencing of the first instance does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015, etc.). The Defendant interfered with the restaurant business by avoiding disturbances, such as putting himself and herself in a cafeteria while driving and wrapping in the cafeteria at the new wall.

In light of the circumstances leading up to the obstruction of business by the defendant, it seems that the intention of the obstruction of business was not strong and agreed with the victim.

However, the defendant is guilty of violence, and constitutes a repeated crime, and there is no new change in circumstances that could change the punishment of the court below in the trial.

In addition, when comprehensively considering the sentencing conditions, such as the defendant's age, sex, environment, etc., as shown in the hearing of the court below and the party, the sentence imposed by the court below was conducted within the reasonable scope of discretion, and is not hot.

3. Accordingly, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.