The judgment below

The guilty portion shall be reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.

The above fine shall be imposed on the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. As to the obstruction of business with respect to the victim C limited partnership company (hereinafter “C”) on December 8, 2010 among the facts charged in the instant case of mistake of facts, in light of the police statements by AV police, statements by AM, AY, AX, and AP, and the status of the Defendant’s trade union, etc., it is sufficient to prove this part of the facts charged, but the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts charged.

(2) In a case where the court below found the Defendant guilty of obstruction of business as of December 8, 2010 on the grounds as above of unfair sentencing, the charges of obstruction of business and obstruction of business, which were found guilty at the court below, shall be sentenced to a single punishment in relation to concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act. Thus, the sentence of the court below (5 million won by the court below) is too unreasonable.

B. As to Defendant (1)’s interference with the business of March 2, 201 among the facts charged in the instant case by mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, ① the subject of bus operation of the instant bus shall be deemed a bus engineer, AG, and a bus company, a bus company, not AK. ② The act of employing a substitute worker by C is prohibited by Articles 43(1) and 91 of the Trade Union and Labor Relations Adjustment Act (hereinafter “Labor Relations Adjustment Act”), and it cannot be deemed as an act of anti-social protection under the Criminal Act, which is a fundamental right of workers under the Constitution. Also, the act of interference with the business of AK constitutes a justifiable act under statutes since it is a substantial exercise of practical power to prevent illegal workers’ input. Since the act of interference with the business of AG constitutes an act of interference with the business of an erroneous political party since the Defendant may be mistaken as a substitute worker.

(2) The lower court’s sentence on the Defendant of unreasonable sentencing (a fine of five million won) is too unreasonable.

2. The lower court’s determination of the Prosecutor’s assertion of mistake of facts is as indicated in its reasoning.