Of them, the part on Defendant B shall be reversed.

Defendant

The pronouncement of sentence against B shall be suspended.

A. As to Defendant B (i) interference with the business set forth in paragraph (1) of the crime of the lower judgment, the lower court convicted Defendant B by misapprehending legal doctrine, despite that Defendant B and A did not intend to interfere with the victim’s I’s work, (i) interference with the passenger car driving on the victim I does not constitute “comfort force” under the crime of the crime of the crime of the crime of the crime of the crime of the crime of the crime of the crime of the crime of the crime of the crime of the crime of the crime of the

Dob. The sentencing of the lower court on Defendant B of unreasonable sentencing ( fine of KRW 700,00) is too unreasonable.

B. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly submitted by the prosecutor (defendant A), Defendant A could be found to have suffered noise exceeding the tolerance limit by using loudspeaker vehicles and obstructed the work of the employees of the victim Corporation. Thus, Defendant A may be fully convicted of the obstruction of the work of the victim’s employees on March 23, 2011 among the facts charged in the instant case against Defendant A, but the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine or acquitted Defendant A of this part of the facts charged.

2. Determination

가. 피고인 B ⑴ 법리오해 주장에 대한 판단 ㈎ 업무방해죄의 ‘위력’이란 사람의 자유의사를 제압ㆍ혼란케 할 만한 일체의 세력으로, 유형적이든 무형적이든 묻지 아니하므로, 폭력ㆍ협박은 물론 사회적ㆍ경제적ㆍ정치적 지위와 권세에 의한 압박 등도 이에 포함되고, 현실적으로 피해자의 자유의사가 제압될 것을 요하는 것은 아니지만, 범인의 위세, 사람 수, 주위의 상황 등에 비추어 피해자의 자유의사를 제압하기 족한 세력을 의미하는 것으로서, 위력에 해당하는지는 범행의 일시ㆍ장소, 범행의 동기, 목적, 인원수, 세력의 태양, 업무의 종류, 피해자의 지위 등 제반 사정을...