The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 5,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the factual errors and misapprehension of the legal principles) is clear that the Defendant installed concrete structures on the access road connected to the telecom parking lot as shown in the facts charged, and it is expected that such act will interfere with the telecom business. Although D’s provisional disposition such as prohibition of passage obstruction filed by the Defendant against B was dismissed, it is merely insufficient to provide explanation as to the necessity of preservation. Rather, the above decision recognizes “a concrete structure is installed on the passage part entering the parking lot of C, which is part of the building’s business.” Even if the Defendant installed a concrete structure with B’s consent, it cannot be determined as a legitimate exercise of property right in the situation of conflict between B and D due to land boundary problems, and comprehensively taking account of the lack of the balance of legal interests, urgency, and supplement requirements, it is reasonable to deem that the Defendant interfered with the victim’s mother business by force. It is difficult to deem that such act constitutes a justifiable act.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the Defendant of the facts charged of this case is erroneous by misapprehending the legal principles.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant had a dispute over the land in the name of de facto marital relationship B, D with the actual owner of the C building, and land boundary issues.

Victim E is a person who leases a lease contract from the actual owner D and leases a C building.

From April 2016, the defendant and the victim have been disputed with land boundary issues.

At around 14:40 on July 2, 2019, the Defendant interfered with the victim’s legitimate maternity business by exercising power by installing 7 concrete structures (a.e., a street) at a distance from the access road to the parking lot of the building operated by the victim and obstructing the passage of vehicles entering the telecom.

B. The lower court’s judgment.