The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (one hundred months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. It is recognized that the defendant has no record of punishment of imprisonment with prison labor or imprisonment without prison labor or heavier punishment.

However, some of the crimes that interfere with the defendant's business of this case committed with the purpose of retaliation against the victim E's reporting to an investigative agency of the defendant.

In addition, the Defendant committed the instant assault crime against the victim G who was a guest in the restaurant operated by the above E without any particular reason.

The defendant did not agree with the victims up to the trial of the case.

The defendant has been punished several times due to violent crimes.

In addition, the above circumstances and the defendant's age, sexual conduct, environment, family relationship, motive and background of the crime, means and consequence of the crime, etc., as shown in the arguments in this case, and the Sentencing Guidelines for the Establishment of the Supreme Court's Sentencing Committee (Interference with the business) Nos. 1 [Scope of the recommended punishment] (6 months to 1 year and 6 months) of the basic area (including the scope of the recommended punishment) (6 months to 1 year and 6 months) of the first category (special person subject to sentencing) [the scope of the recommended punishment] of the second type of the crime without the basic area (2 months to 10 months) [the scope of the recommended punishment] of the first type of the crime (general assault) of the basic area (2 months to 10 months) of the Act on Violence (the person subject to special sentencing] of the court below's final sentencing: in full view of six months to 11 months, etc., it cannot be deemed unfair for the court below's punishment to be too unfair.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, 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.