쟁의행위에 대한 업무방해죄 적용의 타당성과 정책방향 검토:집단적 노무제공 거부행위에 대한 판단사례를 중심으로

This paper analyzes critically indictment customs of the prosecution and interpretations of Supreme Court that apply ‘crime of business interference(Article 314 of the Korean Penal Code)’ to collective refusal to labor as industrial action of labor union. Today, there is no example regards industrial action as subject to criminal prosecution without its justification in the major foreign countries. However we need to consider about the policy that labor law taking some responsibilities of illegal industrial actions that give serious invasions to public welfare. Especially, special restrictions are required for the essential minimum services in the public section rather than nongovernment enterprises. But personally, the regulations of labor law for the public section are enough to operate due to ‘limitation of industrial action for the essential minimum services(Article 42-2 of Labor Union and Labor Relations Adjustment Act).’ In conclusion, it is proper that crime of business interference will not apply to industrial actions which have no gross violation such as justifiable industrial action and collective refusal to labor in terms of universal perspective and legal policy.