All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. As to Defendant (1) misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles (guilty guilty part) (A), the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine as to the public performance of the offense of insult, on the grounds that the Defendant was guilty on the grounds of the victim and witness’s statement, etc. although the Defendant did not insult the victim as stated in this part of the facts charged, there was an error of misunderstanding of facts, and in particular, as to the insult of the Defendant on November 23, 2016, even if the Defendant’s abusive act was committed, the lower court found the Defendant guilty on the ground that there was a situation in which the victim’s family or a person in an occupational relation was in the victim’s family or duty.

(B) On the part of interference with business, the court below found the defendant guilty of interference with business by misunderstanding the facts and misunderstanding the legal principles, since the defendant thought that the removal of computer files at the time of withdrawal was a practice of business, and deleted with D as his successor, there was no intention to interfere with business, and since the whole files were printed out and stored in writing, there was no risk that interference with business could not be caused due to the deletion of files.

(2) The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

B. The prosecutor (1) misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles (the part not guilty) found the defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged by the court below misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles, despite the fact that the defendant had another employee on the second floor of the office and expressed the victim's abusive intent on the first floor regardless of whether the other employee actually took a bath.

(2) The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. Determination.