Providing Lunchboxes to Protesters at the Lighthouse... Supreme Court: "Not Aiding Obstruction of Business"

1st and 2nd Trial Courts Sentence Fine for "Providing Convenience During Sit-in Protest"
Supreme Court Rules "No Causal Relationship for Obstruction of Business" Recognized

The Supreme Court has ruled that sending lunch boxes to union members who occupied a lighting tower and staged a sit-in protest does not constitute aiding and abetting obstruction of business.

The Supreme Court's First Division (Presiding Justice Oh Kyung-mi) overturned the lower court's ruling that sentenced seven members of the Korea Railroad Workers' Union, including Mr. A, who were charged with aiding and abetting obstruction of business, and remanded the case to the Seoul Western District Court with a verdict of not guilty, the court announced on the 12th.

Two union members of the railroad union opposed the Korea Railroad Corporation's policy of rotational transfers and, from April 9 to May 2, 2014, occupied and staged a sit-in protest at a 15-meter-high waiting area midway up a lighting tower at the Korea Railroad Corporation's Vehicle Division in Mapo-gu, Seoul. To ensure their safety, the Korea Railroad Corporation turned off the power to the lighting tower, which led to the suspension of nighttime operations at the Vehicle Division. Subsequently, the two individuals were convicted of obstructing the corporation's business.

Meanwhile, Mr. A and others were prosecuted for installing a tent beneath the lighting tower during the protest period and sending lunch boxes and other food to the occupiers of the lighting tower. They were also charged with holding a rally in support of the protest.

The first and second trial courts recognized that Mr. A and others facilitated the sit-in protest and thus aided and abetted obstruction of business, sentencing them to fines. However, the Supreme Court ruled that their actions do not constitute the crime of aiding and abetting obstruction of business.

The court reasoned that Mr. A and others did not directly participate in the occupiers' act of taking over the lighting tower, that installing the tent and holding the rally were part of union activities, that supportive remarks made at the rally did not substantially contribute to the occupiers' criminal obstruction of business, and that providing lunch boxes was intended to ensure the occupiers' survival and safety. Therefore, it was difficult to establish a causal relationship between Mr. A and others' actions and the occupiers' obstruction of business.

The court stated, "The occupiers of the lighting tower obstructed the Korea Railroad Corporation's business by disabling the tower's original function, but it cannot be concluded that the actions of Mr. A and others were closely related to the occupiers' obstruction of business."

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.