The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendants shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.

The above fine is imposed against the Defendants.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles) the admissibility of the photographs submitted as evidence by N’s statement in the original court, etc., and according to the above photographs, M, N, andO’s statements in the original court, the defendants, by force, interfered with the construction work of the victim I’s new research institute by force.

In the judgment of the court below which acquitted the Defendants on the premise that the above photographs are inadmissible, there is an error of law by misunderstanding of legal principles and misunderstanding of facts.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged (based on the facts) is that the Defendants are occupants residing in the He apartment of the Young-gu, Young-gu, Young-gu, and the victim I is a corporation that intends to build a research institute in the J of the Yeongdeungpo-gu, Young-gu, Young-

On the other hand, the aforementioned apartment occupants, including the Defendants, demanded the suspension of construction due to the reason that the research institute to be built by the injured party had an adverse impact on the residential environment, installed a tent at the entrance of the construction site, and supervised the progress of construction. The victim was dismissed on May 14, 2015, when the application for the prohibition of construction filed by the said apartment occupants was dismissed, the construction was conducted from May 26, 2015.

[2] Around 05:00 on May 26, 2015, K, an occupant of the above apartment, was aware that the construction began with the broadcasting facilities installed in the management office through L, of the fact that the father employed by the injured party during the entrance of the above construction site, who had been making a fluence at the entrance of the above construction site, and that there was a number of occupants of the above apartment, including the Defendants, were gathered at the entrance of the above construction site.

On the other hand, about 30 employees employed by the injured party was able to prevent the outside person from entering the workplace by installing safety fences, and about 10 employees engaged in the punishment work on the inside of the pents.

Accordingly, the defendants demand the suspension of the above construction and present it on the front of the safety pension.