We reverse the judgment of the first instance court.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 500,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts) is as follows: (a) the statements made by the victim G investigative agency that corresponds to the facts charged; (b) the statements made in the court of first instance at the court of first instance at the I, K’s investigative agency and the court of first instance at the court of first instance are reliable; and (c) the evidence with credibility is sufficient to find

The judgment of the court of first instance that acquitted the defendant for lack of evidence is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination:

A. Direct evidence that conforms to the facts charged in the first instance judgment lies in ① the statement in the victim G court and the investigative agency; ② the statement in the court and the investigative agency of I; ③ the statement in March 27, 2015; ③ the statement in March 27, 2015, ④ the legal statement in K and the statement in June 6, 2015, etc.

However, considering the various circumstances under which the evidence presented by the defendant was examined and explained below, the above evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone that the defendant committed the same act as the facts charged.

Unlike that it cannot be readily determined otherwise, there is insufficient evidence to prove the facts charged to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt (the Defendant visited the victim’s restaurant to receive the water supply tax on the day of the instant case and talked about the victim’s size, but the content and degree of the act exceeded the permissible scope by social rules.

(a) The victim filed a complaint only on May 28, 2015, after two months from the date of the instant case, and on May 28, 2015, the victim filed a complaint under the suspicion of interference with the business, and on May 11, 2015, was notified of the disposition of non-guilty suspicion.

(b)The police dispatched to the site on the day of the instant case shall leave the Defendant at a restaurant, take a civil procedure, and do not separately enter the victim or report the content of the disturbance in detail. On that day, the police sent the victim to the site at around 14:11 on that day after receiving a report around 14:08, on that day.