The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The lower court erred by misapprehending the fact that the Defendant did not interfere with the sales business of marina managed by the victim E, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment, although the lower court did not err by misapprehending the fact that the Defendant pronounced guilty of the facts charged.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (an amount of four million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. “Business” subject to protection of interference with business under the Criminal Act as to the assertion of fact is an occupation or a business engaged in continuously and continuously, which is worth protecting from invasion by another person’s unlawful act. Since such business is not necessarily necessary to be lawful or effective, whether it is a business worthy of legal protection is determined depending on whether it actually becomes the foundation of social activities. Even if there are substantive or procedural defects in the process of commencement or performance of such business, the degree does not reach the degree of social norms so long as it does not reach the protection of interference with business (see Supreme Court Decisions 2001Do3587, Sept. 14, 2001; 2007Do3218, Jul. 26, 2007). “Interference with business” refers to all types of force, such as the victim’s free will, but is not a type of political pressure or pressure, and thus, is not a type of crime, such as the victim’s economic power, or any form of force or threat, and thus, is not a type of crime.