A. The meaning of “business” subject to protection of the crime of interference with business, and whether a contract or administrative act based on which the “business” should be lawful (negative)

B. Whether interference with business was caused in establishing the crime of interference with business (negative)

(c) The case holding that it is deemed that there has been a danger that the duties of its members may be hindered due to a series of collective actions for the attendance time table and retirement of its members for the president of the Corporation;

(d) The case holding that an assembly or demonstration on the road and a stairs front of the entrance of a building, the erosion control of which is neither fixed nor closed, constitutes an outdoor assembly or demonstration as provided in subparagraph 1 of Article 2 of the Assembly and Demonstration Act;

E. Whether the application of Article 6(1) of the Assembly and Demonstration Act, which requires a prior report on an outdoor demonstration, is excluded from the scope of Article 6(1) of the Assembly and Demonstration Act on the ground that the required time has been short or peaceful (negative)

A. The term “business” subject to protection of the crime of interference with business refers to a business or business that is engaged in or continuously, which is worth protecting from infringement by another’s unlawful act, and the contract or administrative act, etc., which is the basis of the business, is not necessarily lawful.

B. In establishing the crime of interference with business, it is sufficient to say that the result of interference with business is not required to actually occur, and that there is a risk of causing interference with business.

(c) The case holding that it is deemed that there has been a risk that the duties of the members of the Corporation would be hindered due to a series of collective actions for the time limit for attendance and retirement of the members of the Corporation president;

(d) The case holding that an assembly or demonstration on the road and a stairs front of the entrance of a building with no ceiling or with no all-round closure, constitutes an outdoor assembly or demonstration as provided in subparagraph 1 of Article 2 of the Assembly and Demonstration Act;

E. In holding an outdoor demonstration, the provision of Article 6(1) of the Assembly and Demonstration Act, which requires the chief of the competent police station to report in advance, cannot be deemed excluded from the application of the demonstration since the time required for the demonstration was short time or the demonstration was conducted peacefully.

(b)Article 314 of the Criminal Code. Article 2 subparagraph 1(d) of the Assembly and Demonstration Act. Article 6 (1) of the Assembly and Demonstration Act.

A. Supreme Court Decision 79Do1956 Decided November 25, 1980 (Gong1981, 13471). Supreme Court Decision 4293Do397 Decided August 3, 1960 (Gong854 Decided August 14, 1990), Supreme Court Decision 90Do870 Decided August 198 (Gong1990, 1988).

Defendant

Defendant

Seoul Criminal Court Decision 90No7888 delivered on March 19, 1991

The appeal is dismissed.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

1. As to interference with business:

In relation to the crime of interference with business, the term "business" subject to protection means a business or business that is engaged in or continues to be engaged in an occupation, which is worth protecting from infringement by another person's unlawful act, and the contract or administrative act, which is the basis of the business, is not necessarily lawful.

In this case, even if examining the records, there is no evidence to acknowledge that the unfair pressure of the Minister of Information has been involved, as argued in the deliberation or resolution process for the proposal to appoint and dismiss the president of the Korea Broadcasting System board of directors of the Korea Broadcasting System with respect to the non-indicted clerk, and it does not mean that the above clerk appointed as the president of the said Corporation does not constitute the duties subject to protection of the crime of interference with business.

In addition, the establishment of the crime of interference with business does not require the actual result of interference with business, and it is sufficient that there is a risk of interference with business (see Supreme Court Decision 4293Ma397 delivered on August 3, 1960). Accordingly, according to the evidence presented by the first instance court, it is sufficient to recognize that there is a risk of interference with the business of the defendant, etc. due to a series of collective actions for the attendance time table and retirement of the above clerk's president.

Ultimately, all of the arguments by the court below that are erroneous in misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles on this part are groundless.

2. As to the violation of the Assembly and Demonstration Act

According to the evidence of the first instance court as cited by the court below, the stairs and roads in front of the KBS principal hall, which were pointed out by the theory of lawsuit, shall be deemed as an outdoor assembly or demonstration as provided in Article 2 subparagraph 1 of the Assembly and Demonstration Act, where there is no ceiling or all sides are not closed, and the provisions of Article 6 (1) of the above Act which forces the chief of the competent police station to make a prior report in the event of holding such outdoor demonstration shall not be deemed to be excluded from the application because the time required for the demonstration was short time or the demonstration was carried out peacefully (see Supreme Court Decision 90Do870 delivered on August 14, 1990). The decision of the court below which found the defendant guilty of this part shall not be justified and there is no violation of law as otherwise alleged. The grounds for appeal are without merit.

3. The appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Park Jong-dong (Presiding Justice)