The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant’s act of misunderstanding the facts or misapprehension of the legal doctrine was derived from the process of making a legitimate demand as a passenger in response to the victim’s influenite attitude and bomb, etc., which is a taxi engineer, and subsequently, the police officers dispatched thereafter led to the following acts of infringement of human rights.

B. In full view of the social status of the defendant, the fact that the defendant was under inconvenience at the time when he was found, etc., the defendant interfered with the victim's business by exercising "power".

shall not be deemed to exist.

B. Even if the sentencing is found to be guilty against the Defendant, the first deliberation punishment (amounting to KRW 300,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, the term “power of force” of the crime of obstruction of business is a form of force that may cause a person’s free will to control and confusion. As such, not only violence and intimidation, but also pressure by social, economic, political status, and right. In reality, the victim’s free will to control is not required. However, it refers to the force sufficient to suppress the victim’s free will in light of the offender’s status, number of persons, surrounding circumstances, etc. As such, the determination of whether the act constitutes force ought to be made objectively by taking into account all the circumstances such as the time and place of crime, motive and purpose of crime, number of persons committed, capacity, type of work, type of victim, etc. (see Supreme Court Decision 2009Do5732, Sept. 10, 2009).