logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2019.08.26 2019노846
업무방해
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

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

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

Reasons

1. According to the statements by the victim C (hereinafter “victim”), the current status of the use of electricity, electronic tax invoices, etc., the victim continued to operate the factory at the time of the instant interference with business and prevented the factory from being operated due to the Defendant’s act. The victim’s duty of operating the factory falls under the business subject to the protection of interference with business. Thus, the defendant’s force should be recognized to interfere with the operation of the factory of the victim.

Nevertheless, the court below pronounced innocence, and the court below erred by misunderstanding facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. The lower court found the Defendant not guilty on the ground that it is difficult to see that the Defendant had been engaged in the business of operating the victim’s factory at the time of correcting the factory door of the victim’s operation with locks, and even if such business was carried out, it is difficult to recognize the Defendant’s intention to interfere with the business.

3. Judgment of the court below

A. "Business" subject to protection of the crime of interference with business under the Criminal Act refers to a business or business that is engaged in or continuously, which is worth protecting from infringement by another person's unlawful act. It does not necessarily require a contract or administrative act that is the basis of such business to be lawful. However, if a certain business or activity itself has anti-sociality to the extent that it is considerably unacceptable in social life due to a serious degree of illegality, it does not constitute "business subject to protection of interference with business."

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2001Do2015, Nov. 30, 2001). Also, in relation to the crime of interference with business, the term “business” refers to the whole of the business or affairs continuously performed based on an occupation or social status, and is not determined whether the business is mainly or incidental.

arrow