A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

A. The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles that found the defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged, although the degree of intimidation made by the defendant by the victim does not reach the degree of intimidation, which is an element of the crime of intimidation, and the causal relationship between the defendant's intimidation and the victim's property delivery cannot be

B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (one year and four months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Intimidation, which is the means of a crime of attacking legal principles as to the assertion of legal principles, refers to the threat of harm and injury likely to be frighten to restrict the freedom of decision-making or interfere with the freedom of decision-making. The threat of harm and injury is sufficient if, even if there is no explicit method, it would be sufficient to have the other party aware that it would cause harm and injury to the other party through speech or action, and may be indirectly made through a third party other than the mosor. In cases where an actor demands the delivery of property or pecuniary benefits by using illegal perjury based on his/her occupation, status, etc., and where the other party does not respond to such demand, and where the other party causes an oral awareness that there is a risk of unfair disadvantage if he/she does not respond to such demand, the injury and injury may be acknowledged to the effect that the Defendant committed a medical malpractice operation to the victim, and thus, did not know medical expenses or compensation in the name of such damage or demonstration, etc., or did not take money.

According to this, the victim was aware from the defendant that the defendant could interfere with the business of the victim by means of the sket or demonstration, etc., and the hospital is in accordance with the deliberation or question among the customers.