Case Overview: The Korean Supreme Court ruled that removing a protest banner opposing a redevelopment project does not constitute interference with business (업무방해) — but does amount to property damage (재물손괴).

Background:

Defendant A, head of a redevelopment committee, clashed with C, chair of the landowners’ council, over project plans.

Before a residents’ meeting in 2019, C put up banners urging people not to attend the meeting.

A found the banners and cut the strings with scissors, removing them.


Lower Courts:

1st Instance: Found A not guilty, ruling C’s actions were part of an unprotected private group activity and A’s act was justifiable defense.

Appeal Court: Reversed and fined A 200,000 KRW, holding that the banner represented free expression and that A’s removal was unjustified.


Supreme Court Ruling:

Overturned the appellate decision on the business interference charge.

Held that C’s act of posting the banner was an “one-time expression of opinion”, not a continuous business activity protected by criminal law.

Clarified that “business” under Article 314 of the Criminal Act means a continuous occupation or activity based on a social role, not a one-off protest act.

However, confirmed the property damage conviction for cutting the strings.


Outcome: Case sent back to the Seoul Southern District Court for reconsideration consistent with the Supreme Court’s interpretation.


⚖️ Key Takeaway:
Posting a one-time protest banner isn’t “business,” so removing it doesn’t amount to business interference—but damaging the banner itself still counts as property damage.

Article: https://www.lawtimes.co.kr/Case-curation/212306