The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The court below's scope of trial in this case dismissed the public prosecution as to insult and assault among the facts charged in this case, and convicted the Defendant of obstruction of business. The Defendant appealed the conviction part among the judgment below on the grounds of mistake of fact, mental or physical disorder, and illegality in sentencing, and the prosecutor's dismissal part of the judgment below's dismissal of each public prosecution becomes final and conclusive as it did not appeal against the judgment below. The scope of trial in this

2. Summary of reasons for appeal;

A. The Defendant, as stated in this part of the facts charged, did not interfere with the victim’s convenience store business by bringing a bath to F, an employee of the convenience store.

B. The Defendant, at the time of the instant crime, was under the influence of alcohol, was in a state of having lost or weak ability to discern things or make decisions.

(c)

The punishment of the court below (four months of imprisonment) which is unfair in sentencing is too unreasonable.

3. Determination

A. 1) Determination of the credibility of a confession of the relevant legal doctrine should be made by taking into account all the circumstances, including whether the content of the confession statement itself is objectively reasonable, what is the motive or reason for the confession, what is the circumstance leading to the confession, and what is the circumstance other than the confession, and whether there is any conflict or inconsistency with the confession among the circumstantial evidence other than the confession.

B. In a case where a defendant consistently led to his/her confession from an investigative agency to the trial date, and reversed his/her own confession from the trial date, the court below should examine the motive, reason, and circumstances leading to the reversal of his/her confession in addition to examining the credibility of his/her confession statement, as well as the motive, reason, and circumstances leading to the reversal of his/her confession, and the contents of his/her statement (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do17869, Oct. 13, 2016).