Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant on the ground that it does not constitute a force as referred to in the crime of interference with business.

2. Determination

A. The term “power of force” of the crime of interference with business refers to any force that may cause suppression and confusion with a free will of a person. As such, violence, intimidation, as well as social, economic, political status and pressure based on the right, etc. is not required to control the victim’s free will. In reality, it refers to a force sufficient to suppress the victim’s free will in light of the offender’s status, number of persons, surrounding circumstances, etc. As such, whether it constitutes force ought to be objectively determined by taking into account all the circumstances, such as the date and time and place of crime, motive and purpose of crime, number of persons, capacity, mode of duty, type of duty, status of the victim, etc. (see Supreme Court Decision 2009Do5732, Sept. 10, 200). (b) On the basis of these legal principles, it is difficult to view the Defendants’ act of interference with business as described in the facts charged at the time of the lower court’s judgment, as stated in detail in the circumstances, at the time of the crime.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and there are errors in the misapprehension of legal principles as alleged by the prosecutor.

subsection (b) of this section.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.