On October 22, 2016, around 02:05, the Defendants interfered with FF golf course operations by dump trucks, by force, on the grounds that the victims I, who were in the wife population H, were able to exercise their right of retention within the FF golf course managed by the head of the general affairs team, within the said golf course course course course traffic, on the grounds that they exercise their right of retention.

2. The Defendants and the defense counsel asserted that the Defendants and the defense counsel accumulated the gravel at two places along the kart passage of the golf course as stated in the facts charged, but they asserted to the effect that this is aimed at exercising the right of retention and constitutes a justifiable act under Article 20 of the Criminal Act.

3. Determination

A. According to the records of this case, the following facts are recognized:

1) On September 2014, G Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “G”) entered into a joint agreement with F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “F”) on the introduction and operation of electric car tracks to K located in the wife population J (hereinafter “instant golf course”) at F-si-si-si-si (hereinafter “F”), and G entered into a joint agreement with G to take charge of all the affairs related to the attraction and implementation of the investment funds necessary for the instant golf course. Accordingly, G subcontracted the instant golf course construction and parking lot construction to L Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “L”). L Co., Ltd., Ltd., N Co. (electric equipment construction, employees: Defendant C), Defendant C), Defendant B operatingO (hereinafter collectively “the instant subcontractor, etc.”).