beta
Text
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant
A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for six months and by imprisonment for eight months.
, however, the defendant.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. As to Defendant A1’s interference with the business of misunderstanding facts, Defendant A did not interfere with the victim F’s carpet business, and Defendant B told Defendant B, and did not go beyond 30 to go out of the store, so there was no intention to interfere with the business.
2) The punishment sentenced by the lower court (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
B. The sentence imposed by Defendant B (one year and two months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. Determination as to Defendant A’s assertion of mistake of facts does not necessarily require the intent of interference with the purpose of business or planned interference with business, but it is sufficient to recognize or anticipate the possibility or risk of causing interference with another’s business due to his own act, and its recognition or prediction is not conclusive, but it is so-called willful negligence even if it is uncertain (see Supreme Court Decision 2008Do9410, Jan. 15, 2009). Moreover, “power” of interference with business is any force that may cause suppression and confusion of a person’s free will, and thus, the crime of interference with business is included not only in violence and intimidation, but also in social, economic, political status, pressure, etc., and so on. In reality, the victim’s free will is not required, but also in view of the victim’s free will, but also in terms of the type and purpose of the victim’s free will, and the number of persons involved in the crime should be determined objectively by taking into account the type of the victim’s freedom, the purpose and purpose of the crime, and the number of the person involved.
In addition, the provisional termination is not necessarily required to be a force to a person engaged in the work, but it is sufficient to suppress a person's free will.