All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although Defendant B (Definite) had been divingd in front of Macles, Defendant B’s act cannot be seen as “definite force” in the crime of interference with business, the lower court convicted Defendant B of the facts charged. In so doing, it erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. Defendant C1) misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles as to Defendant C’s charge did not have any desire to the public, as in the instant charges, and Defendant C’s act of photographing the construction site of mobile phone camera cannot be deemed as “defluence” under the crime of interference with business, but the lower court convicted Defendant C of the facts charged, which erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B) The Defendant C’s act is an act to prevent the sudden removal of a store, which is the only means of living of the Defendant, and is an act to protect the right of survival, and thus constitutes a justifiable act under Article 20 of the Criminal Act, and thus, is thus dismissed, the lower court’s judgment convicting Defendant C of the facts charged, which erred by misapprehending the facts, and by misapprehending the legal principles as to the justifiable act, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment. 2) The lower court’s punishment of unfair sentencing (fine 5

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, the lower court determined that the Defendants’ assertion of mistake of facts was 1,00, and the Defendants’ act was interrupted by construction work for approximately two hours, on September 15, 2018, when the parts of E, a field manager, installed the entrance removal work at the entrance of the D underground reporting at the entrance of the D, and around 00:00 on September 15, 2018, Defendant B was placed on the front floor of the poke, and Defendant C and Co-Defendant C were able to take the parts of the construction work on the cell phone camera, and accordingly, the construction work was interrupted for about two hours. The Defendants’ act is all force that can suppress and congested the free will of people.