The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to Jeju District Court Panel Division.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is that the Defendant concluded a contract with the victim for the molding construction necessary to build a warehouse on the ground of the instant land and completed the construction, and that the Defendant interfered with the victim’s business by force by obstructing the construction of a new warehouse of the victim by blocking the construction of a warehouse in a way that prevents the victim from the construction site, on the ground that the victim did not pay the construction cost.

2. The court below found the defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case on the ground that the defendant should be deemed to interfere with the business of the victim by force when considering the fact that the defendant did not partially withdraw construction materials to obstruct the victim's additional construction work and that the victim could not proceed with the additional construction work.

3. However, the lower court’s determination is difficult to accept for the following reasons.

In order to establish a serious crime of omission, which commits a crime involving an act, such as interference with business affairs, by omission, an omission should be deemed the same as an act of commission (see Supreme Court Decision 2003Do80, Apr. 28, 2006). Examining the reasoning and records of the judgment of the court below, the Defendant, partially saved construction materials on the land of the damaged party, and stored them on the construction site, not on the land of the damaged party, but on the original construction site.

It can be seen that construction materials are not easily stored after the completion of construction works.

Although the defendant did not put the construction materials as above for the purpose of receiving the construction cost.

Even if the defendant was accumulated for his own work,

The criminal law is equivalent to active interference with the victim's business as an act of obstructing the victim's business by force that did not simply keep the building materials after the completion of construction work.