The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of two million won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of the grounds for appeal (the mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles);

A. Obstruction of business (1) 1-A of the facts constituting the crime of the court below.

As to the crime of interference with business described in paragraph (1), the Defendant stated that “the victim uses excessive business promotion expenses.”

Even if this constitutes an expression of the Defendant’s opinion or value judgment, it is difficult to view that the Defendant spreaded “false fact”, and ② the Defendant did not have any intention to interfere with business at the time of the crime of interference with business

(2) The crime No. 2-B of the lower judgment

With respect to the crime of interference with business described in paragraph (1), the indictment procedure is null and void in violation of the provisions of the law, because the defendant's criminal act is not specified in the specific fact, and even if the indictment procedure is specified, the defendant's act does not constitute force of the crime of interference with business because the defendant only left the meeting minutes at the time of the meeting of the management body, and the minutes did not interfere with the victim's business, and it does not interfere with the victim's business, and the defendant's act does not constitute force of the crime of interference with business.

(3) At the time of the crime of interference with business as seen above, the Defendant committed an act that does not go against the generally accepted social norms as the agent of D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”), a sectional owner of Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government E (hereinafter “instant building”). Thus, the Defendant’s act as a justifiable act is dismissed as its illegality.

(4) Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal principles or by misapprehending the legal principles on the facts charged, which affected the conclusion of the judgment, on a different premise.

B. The Defendant made a statement as stated in the judgment of the court below.