Deals & Cases

Interference With Business and Related Charges
Interference With Business and Related ChargesNon-Referral

Assistance With an Interference With Business Case | Non-Referral for Interference With Business and Related Charges Arising From a Refund Review of an English Kindergarten

The client, who had been the subject of a criminal complaint on charges of interference with business and defamation, was facing an investigation. With the assistance of an attorney specializing in criminal law, the client received a Non-Referral decision and was able to bring the case to a close.

1. The Client Facing Interference With Business Charges

This is the account of a client who came to our firm while facing a police investigation on charges of interference with business and defamation.

The Course of the Case

Interference With Business, Malicious Online Review, Dissemination of False Facts, Complaint for Interference With Business, Securing Evidence, Claim for Damages

When the client enrolled two children in an English kindergarten, the client paid six months' worth of tuition in a lump sum.

During the fourth month, for personal reasons the client decided to withdraw both children and requested a refund for the remaining two months.

However, the refund amount had been calculated incorrectly.

As a parent, the client naturally had questions about this, and after several inquiries the client still did not receive a clear explanation, and ultimately shared the relevant matter on a parents' online community (mom cafe).

However, the post was a review based on objective facts and the client's own experience, written for the purpose of sharing information among parents.

Nevertheless, the academy filed a criminal complaint for defamation and for interference with business through the dissemination of false facts, and the client came to our firm while facing a police investigation.

2. Defense Strategy for the Suspect in the Interference With Business Case

Interference With Business, Interference by Deceit, Conduct Obstructing Business, Filing of a False Report, Responding to a Police Investigation, Level of Criminal Punishment


For the client, who had been the subject of a criminal complaint on charges of interference with business and defamation, our firm's attorney specializing in criminal law actively denied the alleged facts, focusing on the following points.

The Criminal Attorney's Strategy | ① Reviewing the Client's Situation and Initial Response

At the initial consultation stage, the criminal attorney closely examined what the client's mom cafe post had actually contained, whether it stated false facts, and whether there had been any intent to defame.

The attorney also analyzed the main thrust of the complaint and confirmed that the issues were whether false facts had been disseminated, whether there was intent, and whether there was a purpose to defame.

The Criminal Attorney's Strategy | ② Establishing the Facts and Securing Evidence

In order to concretely prove what the client had actually experienced during the refund process, the criminal attorney submitted the following materials.

∙ Call and KakaoTalk records with the English kindergarten

∙ The refund amount breakdown and informational materials

∙ A screen capture of the post's content at the time

These served as important grounds proving that the client's post constituted a review based on objective facts and experience.

The Criminal Attorney's Strategy | ③ Emphasizing That It Served “the Public Interest”

The criminal attorney argued that the mom cafe post was not mere defamation, but had been written for the following purposes.

∙ Providing information about the academy's refund policy

∙ A public-interest purpose of preventing harm to other parents

This was, in legal terms, a strategy of denying the “purpose to defame” and emphasizing the public-interest nature of providing information.

The Criminal Attorney's Strategy | ④ Argument That the Elements of the Charge Were Not Satisfied

The criminal attorney emphasized that the post did not contain false facts, that it did not specify the name of the complainant's academy, and that it amounted to no more than a personal review and an expression of opinion.

In addition, through a legal explanation that the alleged facts themselves did not satisfy the elements of the charge and the presentation of precedents, the attorney persuasively argued that the suspect's conduct was not subject to punishment.

Supreme Court Decision 2021Do6634, decided September 30, 2021

In the crime of interference with business, “dissemination of false facts” means disseminating facts that objectively do not accord with the truth, and merely expressing an opinion or value judgment does not fall within this.

Where, considering the overall purport of the content, the important parts accord with objective facts and there are merely slight differences in detail or somewhat exaggerated expressions, so that there is no risk of interfering with another person's business, this does not fall within it.

3. Assistance Result in the Interference With Business Case: Non-Referral

Interference With Business, Disturbing a Place of Business, Establishment of Interference With Business, Whether a Person Participated as an Accomplice, Criminal Settlement, Leniency of a Fine

Through the active response of the criminal attorney on the interference with business and defamation charges, the investigative authorities determined that the client's conduct did not meet the requirements for criminal punishment and issued a “Non-Referral (No Suspicion of Crime)” decision.

With the criminal attorney's assistance, the client was able to overcome the unfair complaint, be relieved of legal responsibility, and conclude the case without harm.

Information on Interference With Business and Defamation

Interference with business is established where, for the purpose of interfering with another person's legitimate business, a person disseminates false facts, or impedes the performance of business by deceit or force (Article 314 of the Criminal Act).


In particular, “interference with business through the dissemination of false facts” arising from online posts, reviews, and mom cafe posts is frequently at issue, and recently it has become a common type of dispute among those engaged in service industries, such as academies, hospitals, and small business owners.

The problem is that the boundary between “false facts” and “expression of opinion” is highly ambiguous.


Accordingly, the investigative authorities comprehensively consider the overall context of the post, the social circumstances, and the manner of expression in order to determine the following.

▷ Is it an opinion or a fact?

▷ Was there a public-interest purpose?

▷ Was there an actual risk of interference with business?

Level of Punishment for Interference With Business

Statutory Provision

Level of Punishment

Article 314 of the Criminal Act

Imprisonment for not more than five years, or a fine of not more than 15 million won

By contrast, defamation under the Network Act (Information and Communications Network Act) may be established where the content, whether it states a fact or a false fact, has the potential to lower a specific person's social reputation.

Elements of Defamation

∙ Through an information and communications network, publicly

∙ Disclosing a fact or a false fact

∙ Thereby harming another person's reputation

At this point, the level of punishment varies depending on whether the disclosed fact is false.

Level of Punishment for Defamation

Disclosure of a Fact

Imprisonment for not more than three years, or a fine of not more than 30 million won

Disclosure of a False Fact

Imprisonment for not more than seven years, suspension of qualifications for not more than ten years, or a fine of not more than 50 million won

If You Have Been the Subject of a Criminal Complaint

If you have been unfairly made the subject of a criminal complaint as described above, it is most important to set out in concrete terms the background to the case, the circumstances at the time, and the context of the statements.

Legal analysis must be carried out together with securing evidence and establishing a response strategy in order to avoid unfair punishment.

After the consultation, Daeryun Law Firm assigns an attorney specializing in the relevant type of case and, through a systematic response, including organizing the client's statements, securing relevant evidence, submitting a defense counsel's written opinion, and accompanying the client to the police investigation, blocks unfavorable misunderstandings in advance.

In addition, depending on the nature of the case, where necessary the firm collaborates with experts in specialized fields, such as evidence examination and psychological counseling, to reduce the client's burden.

If you are confused after being unfairly made the subject of a criminal complaint, we recommend that you obtain legal assistance by booking 🔗a legal consultation appointment.

Daeryun, the ninth-largest law firm in Korea (based on 2025 National Tax Service value-added tax filings), helps resolve cases through the systematic strategies of legal experts across many fields.

FAQ on Interference With Business

Q. Can interference with business be established merely by writing a review?

A. Writing a review or expressing an opinion does not, in itself, immediately establish interference with business.

It is generally established only where there has been a “dissemination of false facts” or “interference by deceit or force.”

Therefore, if a review is based on facts and was made for a public-interest purpose, there is a high likelihood of being cleared of the interference with business charge.

Q. Why do online reviews or social media posts lead to complaints for interference with business?

A. These days, it is common for consumers to post reviews through mom cafes, blogs, and social media.

However, when content unfavorable to a particular business spreads, the business often claims “interference with business through the dissemination of false facts” and files a complaint for interference with business, which is why such cases have increased.

In particular, among business operators, filing a complaint for interference with business together with “defamation” has become established as a kind of response measure.

업무방해죄

This content is based on actual cases handled by Daeryun Law LLC and has been partially adapted. All copyrights belong to Daeryun Law LLC.
Unauthorized reproduction, copying or distribution may result in legal action under applicable laws.

Interference With Business and Related Charges: Want a faster, more detailed consultation?

Consult a
specialized attorney

Related Information

Explore legal information related to this case.

Explore more legal information

Daeryun's Key Strengths

Daeryun's key strengths background
Litigation strategy using
Daeryun's own AI & IT technology

Litigation strategy using Daeryun's own AI & IT technology

More than 240
key members

More than 240 key members

*experience_cnt*+ cases handled
per month

1,200+ cases handled per month

* 2025년 월평균 기준
Complies with Korean Bar Association Advertising Regulations Article 4 (1)

Explore
more strengths
Explore more strengths arrow

Book a legal
consultation with an attorney

All consultations are reviewed by a specialized attorney first,
so they are conducted by appointment only.

Phone consultation

1800-7905

Available 24 hours a day, 365 days a year

Phone consultation
Online consultation

Online consultation

We provide tailored
legal services for our clients.

Chat consultation

Chat consultation

KakaoTalk channel
Daeryun Law LLC Attorneys

Request a consultation

Related Members

View more
Attorney JaeBong JEONG

JaeBong JEONG

T. 070-7510-1820

Experience as chief prosecutor at Uijeongbu District Prosecutors’ Office and chief prosecutor at Busan District Prosecutors’ Office

Attorney YeoJin HWANG

YeoJin HWANG

T. 070-5117-5510

criminal lawyer

Attorney Gwan Hun BYEON

Gwan Hun BYEON

T. 070-7510-1755

criminal lawyer

Attorney JiHye GWON

JiHye GWON

T. 070-5221-2805

criminal lawyer

Attorney EuiSeok SONG

EuiSeok SONG

T. 070-5221-0865

criminal lawyer

Key Case Studies

View more

Related Practice Areas

View more
View our Case Handling System

Consult in other languages

Popular Columns

View more

Previous

Private Equity Fund Advisory | Protecting Corporate Management Control and Securing Investment Funds

Next

Assistance From a Traffic Accident Attorney | Non-Referral for a Client in a Hit-and-Run Injury Case

View list
Quick Menu

Chat