All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendants merely intended to exercise the right of retention and did not actually cause interference with the business of the victim, and even if there is room to deem the Defendants’ act constituted a justifiable act, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby convicting the Defendants of the facts charged in the instant case.

2. Determination

(a) In the establishment of the crime of interference with business by the relevant legal principles, the result of interference with business does not require actual occurrence, but should be adequate if there is a risk of interference with business to cause the result of interference with business, and the "influence to business" includes not only interference with the execution of business, but also interference with business

(See Supreme Court Decision 200Do3231 Decided March 29, 2002, etc.). “Act which does not violate the social rules” under Article 20 of the Criminal Act refers to an act which is acceptable in light of the overall spirit of legal order, or the social ethics or social norms surrounding it, and the illegality of a certain act is excluded as a legitimate act that does not violate the social norms should be determined individually under specific circumstances. Thus, in order to recognize such a legitimate act, the following requirements should be met: (a) legitimacy of motive or purpose of the act; (b) reasonableness of means or method of the act; (c) balance between the benefit of protection and infringement; (d) balance between the benefit of infringement; and (e) supplementary nature that there is no other means or method than the act.

B. (See, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2002Do5077, Dec. 26, 2002).

Based on the above legal principle, considering the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court as to the instant case based on the foregoing legal principle, the victim company’s work will be caused by the Defendants’ act.