The judgment below

Part concerning Defendant G and I shall be reversed.

Defendant

G and I shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles 1) Defendant G and I’s act of interference with business is merely an act conducted to verify an illegal act on the part of the contractor according to due process and to obtain the judgment from the person in charge of the Ulsan-gun. However, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine that recognized the crime of interference with business. 2) It is clear that the Defendants’ act of interference with business constitutes “an act which does not violate social rules” under Article 20 of the Criminal Act, because it satisfies the requirements such as the motive or justification of the act, the legitimacy of the means or method of the act, the reasonableness of the means or method of the act, the balance between the protected interest and the benefit of infringement, urgency

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine and thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment, which rejected the allegation of the aforementioned justifiable act.

B. The lower court’s respective punishment (Defendant G, and I: fine of two million won each) imposed on the above Defendants is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on misconception of facts and misapprehension of legal principles

A. In full view of the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts, the above defendants' assertion of mistake of facts is not accepted, since it is sufficiently recognized that the above defendants interfere with the work of the victims as stated in the facts constituting the crime of this case.

B. In regard to the assertion of misapprehension of legal principles, the court below held that an act that does not violate social rules as stipulated in Article 20 of the Criminal Act refers to an act that is acceptable in light of the overall spirit of legal order, social ethics, or social norms, and thus, it is not the legitimacy of the motive or purpose of the act, the reasonableness of the means or method of the act, the balance between the protected interest and the infringed interest, and other means except the act.