업무방해
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 700,000.
The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. 1) The victims' illegal act of installing the partitions of this case, which is likely to cause damage to the other shop owners, should be immediately removed. Thus, the Defendant's measures to voluntarily remove the partitions, which do not violate social rules, and thus, cannot be deemed unlawful. 2) The Defendant alleged legal errors, as the president of the Self-Governing Management Council, executed the instant subdivision measures in accordance with the management rules amended at the Self-Governing Management Council, and there was procedural defect in the amendment of the management rules.
Even if the defendant was not aware that the amended management rules are void by law or articles of incorporation, etc., he did not think that the revised management rules do not constitute a crime even if they were taken by the pre-amended management rules.
Ultimately, the defendant's mistake is justified and thus cannot be punished in accordance with Article 16 of the Criminal Act.
3) Nevertheless, the lower court convicted the Defendant by misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding relevant legal principles. B. The lower court’s sentence against the Defendant claiming unfair sentencing (hereinafter “fine 2,00,000”) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal ex officio, the prosecutor applied for changes in indictment to the effect that the part of the facts charged in this case was changed in the trial before the judgment on the grounds for appeal for ex officio judgment, and this court permitted this, and thus, the judgment of the court below was no longer maintained.
However, the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles is still subject to the judgment of this court within the scope of such argument.
B. The judgment of the court below is legitimate in finding a mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles.