A. As to the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes) by prosecutor (1) or by misunderstanding the legal principles, the court below acquitted the Defendant of this part of the facts charged, even though the evidence submitted by the prosecutor was found to have a purpose of preventing any retaliation and any further statement in the future, etc.

(2) The lower court’s sentencing (two years of suspended sentence in six months of imprisonment) is too unjustifiable and unreasonable.

B. The lower court’s sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. (1) On September 12, 2013, the Defendant, of the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, etc. (in the instant charges, injury, etc. by clothes) among the facts charged, was investigated by the Prosecutor’s Office No. 208 of the Daejeon District Prosecutors’ Office No. 72-16, Dong-dong, Dong-dong, Chungcheongnam-gu, Daejeon District Public Prosecutor’s Office No. 208 of the Daejeon District Public Prosecutor’s Office No. 208 ( age 65) against the thief, etc., and was examined by the Prosecutor’s Office No. 2013 type No. 18352, the Defendant stated

However, the defendant tried to take a retaliation against the victim, and to threaten the victim not to make a statement at an investigation agency in the future.

around September 12, 2013, the Defendant found the victim as the front parking lot in front of the main office of the Daejeon District Prosecutors' Office, and completed the investigation and thereafter, the victim was investigated at around 20:0-21:00 on the same day, and then the victim went to the parking lot through the watchkeeping office of the Yananananananananananananananananananananananananananananananananananananananananananananananananananananananananananananananananananananananananananananananananananananananananananananananananananananananananan