A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

except that the ruling shall be made for one year from the date of the final judgment.

A. The Defendant of mistake of facts did not commit any act of assaulting or injuring the victim D, or committed any act of interference with business, defamation, etc., and there is only the victim’s statement as evidence to prove it. The victim’s statement is not consistent and cannot be trusted. Thus, the judgment of the court below which convicted the Defendant of the whole facts charged of this case on the ground that the victim’s statement was reliable.

B. In light of the legal principles as to (i) the crime of interference with business, the victim, who is the Defendant’s wife, was subject to suspicion of embezzlement of company funds at the time of the instant case, and thus, there was a reasonable ground for prohibiting the victim’s entry.

Therefore, although the defendant's act of prohibiting the victim's access does not constitute an element of the crime of interference with business, the judgment below which found the defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged is erroneous by misapprehending the legal principles as to the establishment of

Since K et al., at the time of the instant case, had been an employee at the scene at the time of the instant case, there is no possibility that the Defendant would spread facts. Therefore, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged, which erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the public performance of defamation.

Article 22(1) of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, Etc. (amended by Presidential Decree No. 2010, Jan. 1, 2011; Presidential Decree No. 20135, Feb. 21, 201; Presidential Decree No. 2010, Feb. 21, 2011).