The defendant shall be innocent.

The summary of the judgment of innocence against the defendant shall be published.

The summary of the facts charged in this case is that the defendant operated the "○○ Ba" in the 141 Dong Dong-dong, Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul. On January 23, 2007, on the ground that the victim non-indicted 1, who was operating the Sari business by leasing a part of the above Sarina around 15:00 on the ground that the victim non-indicted 1, who was operating the Sari business, was friendly to the customers and damaged the image of the Sari, thereby interfering with the victim's life business by force, such as making the victim's sari that he want to engage in sari against the customers, and drawing it to the sari or the escape room outside the sari, the court below found him guilty on the basis of the statement in the court and the investigative agency of non-indicted 1.

2. Summary of grounds for appeal by the defendant (misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles);

The Defendant did not have exercised a “defluence” that interferes with the victim’s work. The Defendant’s act merely leads the victim to a sense that the victim might not salute the victim in order to give the customer a bath, and thus, the Defendant’s act is deemed to be unlawful.

3. Judgment of the court below

(a) Facts of recognition;

The following facts are recognized in full view of all the circumstances shown in the argument of this case, including Nonindicted 2’s statement in the court room.

○ around June 2006, the Defendant purchased the instant friendship or building from Nonindicted 3 and carried on the instant friendship or business. However, around 2004, the victim entered into a contract with Nonindicted 3 for the service of bathing facilities, and had been engaged in the instant friendship or service at the time from that time.

Since the Defendant started the instant friendship or business, the victim was satisfying with self-satisfing the alcohol in satisfy.

○ The victim was accommodated in the instant letter of communication at the instant letter of communication, and her house from a day to a day of each week. Accordingly, the Defendant had another person engage in a letter of credit during that period.

○ However, on the day of the instant case, the victim drinked alcoholic beverages, and took a bath to make it impossible for people and customers who performed the said three services to enter, and took a disturbance.

○ The Defendant listened to this novel and flageded to the victim “I will not have any son,” which led to the Plaintiff’s knife and out of it.

○ Meanwhile, the victim made a statement at the investigative agency to the effect that he is free from the Defendant, but, at the time, Nonindicted 4, who was in charge of the victim’s dental examination and treatment, had symptoms around the patriarche (a disease that caused the patriarche), but the victim stated that the victim was not a disease caused by the victim’s violence.

The victim stated in the court below that the defendant does not want to be punished.

B. Determination

First of all, it seems considerably inappropriate for the defendant to have had another person who is not the victim at the time of the instant case work for the third person, since the victim had the right to the third person to the third person.

However, based on the above facts of recognition, the number of circumstances shown in the argument of this case, namely, ① the portion of the services in the instant friendship or business, ② Nevertheless, the victim was frequently engaged in acts that cause disadvantages to the instant friendship or business itself, such as drinking alcohol and abusiveing to customers, ③ the contract for the use of bathing facilities prepared by the victim and Nonindicted 3 also provides for the reasons for the destruction of the contract. ④ The defendant seems to allow others to engage in an act of drinking only when there is no victim. ⑤ The victim at the time of the instant case, ⑤ The victim was flicking the victim, such as drinking, and blicking the customer, and the defendant was flicking the victim in order to show the victim out of his place, ② The victim was flicking the victim, and the degree of abuse of rights by the defendant at the time of the instant case (the defendant’s assertion that the act does not constitute force is not justified). The defendant’s act does not constitute an act of infringement of social interests or interests of the victim at the time of the instant case.

C. Sub-committee

Nevertheless, the court below found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case. The court below erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of judgment.

4. Conclusion

Therefore, since the appeal of this case by the defendant is well-grounded, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the following judgment is rendered again.

As seen above 1. The facts charged in this case constitute a case where it is not a crime or there is no proof of a crime, and thus, the defendant is acquitted in accordance with Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the summary of the verdict of innocence is announced in accordance with Article 58(2) of the Criminal Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Han Chang-ho (Presiding Judge)