beta
Text
All appeals are dismissed.
Reasons
The grounds of appeal are examined.
1. Part concerning interference with business
A. The lower court, based on its stated reasoning, conspired with the Defendants to exercise power in the same manner as indicated in this part of the facts charged.
The court of first instance affirmed the judgment that the victims did not prove that the possession of the main building among the instant hospitals was lost, thereby obstructing the exercise of the right of retention.
B. According to the reasoning of the first instance judgment as cited by the lower court and the record, Defendant B, along with the guard company employees, opened the door door as the key to the entrance through the windows opened behind the main building on May 9, 2011, and opened the door door as corrected in the reinforcement glass door installed to block the passage of corridor traffic by entering the building, and opened the door door through the street, and thereafter Defendant A, C, E, and other construction business operators opened the door door as the building, and the services employed by the S and victims employed by the victims were out of the hospital.
According to these facts, it is difficult to accept the judgment of the court below that the Defendants did not prove that they had exercised their power at the time of entering the main building on the date stated in this part of the facts charged.
C. However, we affirm the judgment of the court below that the Defendants’ above actions did not prove that they interfere with the victims’ exercise of the right of retention.
1) To establish “the crime of interference with business by force” as prescribed in Article 314 of the Criminal Act, there is no need to actually create a result of interference with business, but there is a risk of causing interference with business (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2002Do3453, Apr. 15, 2005). 2) The lower court comprehensively takes into account the following circumstances, and thereby, performs duties to exercise the right of retention of the victims.