The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of legal principles) that the defendant's act exceeds the level of the claim that the patient's guardian can normally perform, and at the time he was receiving medical treatment

In light of the fact that F Uneasiness was caused and the dental surgery of this case was not re-Visitsed, the Defendant’s act constitutes a threat of force on the part of the Defendant, and even if the Defendant could have been recognized as an intentional obstruction of business, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby acquitted the Defendant of the facts charged in this case.

2. In full view of the circumstances acknowledged by the evidence submitted by the prosecutor and the Defendant, the lower court determined that “it is difficult to view that the Defendant’s act was based on the intent to interfere with the victim’s business by exercising his/her influence over or to interfere with the victim’s freedom of mind” solely on the evidence submitted by the prosecutor and the Defendant.

However, in light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the court below, i.e., the circumstance acknowledged by the above evidence, i.e., ① the defendant is memoryed with the nurse H prior to leaving the instant hospital, ② the occurrence of a sudden situation at the instant hospital is due to the defendant who wants H to leave the hospital, and the police officer called the hospital, and is not considered due to the voice in the process of resisting H before leaving the hospital. ③ In light of the above facts, the judgment of the court below is just and there is no error as alleged by the prosecutor, and there is such error as alleged by the prosecutor.

subsection (b) of this section.

3. Thus, the prosecutor's appeal is without merit.