1. As to interference with the operation of racing, the lower court determined that: (a) Nonindicted Co-Defendant B and C sent text messages to the corrected athletes 40 times more than merely informing the contents of the resolution; (b) continued to use text messages to encourage the racing players to participate in the racing on the following occasions: (c) it continued to use text messages to encourage the racing players to participate in the racing and to participate in the racing on 40 occasions; (c) it continued to use text messages to encourage the racing players to participate in the racing without merely notifying the contents of the resolution; (d) it appears that the corrective athletes interfere with the racing activities of this case by taking into account the following text messages: (a) it was inevitable to receive the direction and supervision of the foregoing Corporation on the grounds of ensuring fairness in racing; and (b) the Defendant made a decision to participate in the racing on the following grounds: (a) the instant text messages registered as the association of the instant players; and (b) the Defendant did not encourage the racing players to participate in the racing and to participate in the racing on 100 billion won.

In light of the relevant legal principles and records, the above determination by the court below is just and acceptable, and contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, the act of interference with business, force, and legitimate industrial action.