A. The Defendant, misunderstanding of the fact, merely stated that he did not interfere with the victim’s taxi business by exercising force on the part of the victim, to determine whether the victim was refused to take passengers or not.

However, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty is erroneous in the misconception of facts.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (an amount of KRW 500,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts, the term "power of force" of the crime of interference with business refers to all the forces that may cause confusion with a free will of a person, and thus, the pressure by social and political status, etc. as well as intimidation is included. In reality, it is not necessary to control the victim's free will, and it means the force sufficient to suppress the victim's free will in light of the offender's circumstances and surrounding circumstances. The determination of whether it constitutes force should be made objectively by taking into account all the circumstances such as the time and place of the crime, motive, purpose of the crime, form of force, type of duty, status of the victim, etc. (see Supreme Court Decision 2009Do5732, Sept. 10, 2009, etc.). The evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, namely, the victim is a cab operated by the defendant, and the victim is a Gyeonggi-do party.

As the victim demanded, the victim demanded the defendant to leave the taxi on the ground that the taxi operated by the victim was not attached to Incheon si and the taxi in the city, and that the taxi can grow well, and even though the victim stopped at a good place for the defendant's unloading and requested the defendant to leave the taxi on several occasions, the defendant would report to the police to the defendant who would not grow up.

In other words, the defendant was found to have operated his business.

“A public bath” together with the horses, etc.