1. The crime of interference with business under Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act is established when a person interferes with business of another by deceptive means or by force. The term "power" here means all force that may cause confusion with the free will of a person. Although it is not necessary to control the victim's free will in reality, it is not necessary to control the victim's free will in light of the offender's status, number of persons, surrounding circumstances, etc., and it should be determined objectively by taking into account all the circumstances such as the time and place of the crime, motive, purpose, number of persons to commit the crime, form of force, type of duty, status of the victim, etc.

In addition, the power does not necessarily mean a person engaged in a business who is directly engaged in the business, and it does not necessarily mean a force, and an act that makes it impossible or considerably difficult to act freely by forming an external situation to control a person’s free will (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Do5732, Sept. 10, 2009). Meanwhile, the power of interference with business should be exercised to the victim as a matter of principle. As such, in a case where a third party is not the victim of the exercise of the power, the power of interference with business against the victim is established by directly causing the possibility of suppressing the victim’s free will, and thus, it constitutes a crime of interference with business with the victim under special circumstances that make it identical with the exercise of the victim’s free will (see Supreme Court Decision 2010Do410, Mar. 14, 2013). In the event of exercising the power by notifying it, the other party and the victim’s threat of harm and injury should be distinguished from the victim.

If the power was exercised by force, the third party will have a threat of harm, which is the content of force.