The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

1. Summary of the grounds for appeal (the mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles);

A. The Defendant had no intention to interfere with business because he/she removed documents, such as written public notice, in order to collect evidence to be used in a lawsuit seeking invalidation of qualification for the members of the C Apartment Election Commission.

B. The election management duties of the election commission of this case do not constitute an illegal act and thus constitute a duty of protection under the Criminal Act.

C. The Defendant’s act of removing only a part of the written notice of the instant decision does not constitute a force exercise.

The chairperson of the election commission of this case illegally elected the representative of the apartment building and spread false facts to the representative of the apartment building and honor the defendant's children, so the defendant is removed from the public notice in order to prevent this.

Therefore, the defendant's act is not illegal as it does not violate social rules.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged is as follows: (a) the Defendant removed documents, such as the notice of holding and announcing meetings of the election commission and emergency response committee on September 26, 2014; (b) the notice of holding and announcing meetings of the election commission and emergency response committee on September 30, 2014; (c) the notice of holding and announcing meetings of the second election commission and emergency response committee on October 6, 2014; (d) the notice of the result of the visit voting and dismissal on October 16, 2014 from around November 17, 2014; (e) the notice of the result of the visit voting and dismissal on October 16, 2014 (Election 1, 5, and 6); (e) the notice of the election of the representative of each building; and (e) the notice of the candidate’s publication; and (e) the notice of the publication of the registration of the ballot on October 23, 2014; and (e) discarded the victim apartment election affairs by force of the Defendant.

B. The lower court determined that the Defendant’s arbitrary removal of the notice posted on the elevator bulletin board, 113 1 Ra, 13-dong apartment of this case from five times constitutes the threat of interference with business, and found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in the instant case.

Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act.