The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal stated in the facts charged in this case, notwithstanding that the lawful representative director of the D Co., Ltd. was the defendant, if he was newly appointed as the representative director of the said Co., Ltd., and was to unlawfully occupy and use the said Co., Ltd.’s office, the defendant merely pointed out that he was the representative director. As such, E’s business does not constitute a business subject to protection of the crime of interference with business under the Criminal Act, and the defendant did not engage in interference with business by extracting computer code or sending communications companies’ staff, but the court below erred by misapprehending the facts

2. Determination

A. Whether the instant business is subject to protection of the crime of interference with business under the Criminal Act or subject to protection of the crime of interference with business under the Criminal Act is an occupational or continuous work or business, which is worth protecting from infringement by another person’s unlawful act. It does not necessarily require a contract or administrative act, etc. which forms the basis of the business, to be lawful. However, in a case where a certain business or activity itself has anti-sociality to the extent that it is considerably unreasonable in light of social life due to a serious degree of illegality, it cannot be viewed as an “business subject to protection of interference with business.”

(See Supreme Court Decision 2001Do5592 Decided August 23, 2002, etc.). Comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the following facts are as follows: ① (a) the directors of the company temporarily affiliated with D (hereinafter “D”) in the corporate register of the Defendant, the representative director, the E, and the K outside director, and (b) the Defendant and E jointly operated D; (c) the fact that E was appointed as a new representative director through the resolution of the board of directors dated December 3, 2010 (registration date); and (b) E was appointed as the representative director, and then P. to perform D’s duties.