The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (as to the intrusion upon residence and obstruction of business), as the Defendant had a claim for construction cost as to the instant building against the victim F at the time of entering the instant building, and as the instant building 101 and 102, to which the Defendant entered, had been continuously occupied from the process of construction, the Defendant is a place where the Defendant had been continuously occupied. As such, the establishment of a legitimate right of retention and the crime of interference with business is not established.

Even if not, the defendant enters the above place for the purpose of exercising the right of retention, so at least the defendant did not have an intention to intrude upon his residence.

Nevertheless, since the court below found all of the charges of intrusion upon residence and obstruction of business of this case guilty, the court below erred by misunderstanding the facts, or by misapprehending the legal principles on lien and intrusion upon residence.

2. The defendant alleged the same purport as the argument of mistake of facts in the court below, and the court below rejected the above argument in detail, and in light of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the judgment of the court below is legitimate, and the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles are without merit

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.