On July 30, 2015, the Defendant only entered into a contract with the victim company to request the production of a license and to receive the license from the victim company, but did not manufacture the license, and the victim company was well aware that it manufactured and sold the license of a domestic and foreign well-known brand.

Nevertheless, from September 2015 to November 2016, the Defendant was entitled to exclusive manufacture and sale until December 31, 2015 by the victim company in the case of F, G, and H brand, respectively, and in the case of I, J, K, and L brand, even though the victim company had previously manufactured and sold exclusively before the victim company, C’s brand page -C is a group of product planning, manufacture, design, marketing strategy, marketing strategy, and distribution strategy experts.

- Having reached the title of the pertinent page, and the MYEWARING (production, production) of the pertinent page, it was deemed to be a eYEWAR, and the eYAR was recorded under the name of the brand called I, F, G, H, H, J, K,K, and L (hereinafter “the pertinent brand”) to spread false facts as being specialized in manufacturing the above brand license in the Defendant Company, thereby hindering the victim Company’s management of customers, such as maintaining the contractual relationship and attracting new customers.

2. Determination

A. In the formation of a crime of interference with business, the result of interference with business does not require actual occurrence, and the occurrence of the risk of interference with business is sufficient, but the crime of interference with business should not be established if there is no risk of interference with business.

B. C website of the Defendant’s operation attached to the complaint.