(a) interference with business

B. Violation of the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act

1. A;

2. B

3. C

Defendants

Supreme Court Decision 2013Do12530 Decided May 14, 2015

Jeju District Court Decision 2015No254 Decided September 17, 2015

January 28, 2016

All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment as to Defendant A’s grounds of appeal in light of the evidence duly admitted by the lower court, the lower court’s determination that the lower court found the Defendant guilty of interfering with one’s business on February 9, 2012 among the facts charged in the instant case on the grounds indicated in its reasoning is justifiable, and contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, there were no

2. As to Defendant B and C’s appeal

Defendant B and C did not file a statement of grounds for appeal within the statutory period (the above Defendants served the notice of receipt of the records of trial on October 19, 2015 and served the notice of receipt of the records of trial on October 19, 2015, the submission period for the grounds for appeal.

13. There is no statement on the grounds of appeal in the petition of appeal on the sole ground that the appellate brief was not filed by the deadline after the statutory period expires.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, all appeals are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Ko Young-han

Justices Lee In-bok

Justices Kim Gin-young

Justices Lee Ki-taik