beta
Text
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 700,000.
The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.
Reasons
1. In full view of the summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts and legal principles), victim and police officers’ statements, etc., the Defendant’s act constitutes “power” of interference with business affairs. However, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby acquitted the Defendant of the facts charged in this case.
2. Determination
A. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case was from around 07:25 on November 22, 2016 to around 07:50 on the same day, the Defendant did not pay the taxi fee to the victim due to the wind that the victim E was under the influence of alcohol, even though he/she boarded the F taxi operated by the victim E on the front side of Songpa-gu Seoul, and arrived at the destination. The Defendant requested the victim and the police officer to pay the taxi fee to the police officer who arrived at the scene upon receiving the victim’s 112 report and to leave the taxi at the scene. However, the Defendant rejected the vehicle and prevented other customers from boarding the taxi by refusing the vehicle.
Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the victim's taxi operation by force.
B. The lower court found the Defendant not guilty of the facts charged of this case on the ground that the evidence presented by the prosecutor alone was insufficient to recognize that the Defendant exercised “power” sufficient to suppress the victim’s free will.
(c)
The term "power of force" in the crime of interference with the deliberation of the party is all force that may cause confusion with the free will of a person, and is not tangible, intangible, or intangible. As such, intimidation as well as violence, social economic status and pressure by the right and interest, etc. are also included therein, and in reality, it is not necessary to control the victim's free will. However, it is a suppression of the victim's free will in light of the offender's status, number of persons, surrounding circumstances, etc.