According to the evidence of this case, the defendant could be found to have threatened the victim with a passenger car as stated in the facts charged, and the court below erred by misapprehending the facts and finding the defendant not guilty.

Judgment

A. On June 3, 2019, the Defendant: (a) driven a village bus around 18:45 on June 3, 2019; and (b) took a warning to the effect that, on the two-lane roads in front of the D New Young Port point in Suwon-gu, Suwon-si, the Defendant would depart from the F SPP car in front of the Defendant’s bus in front of the Defendant’s bus.

After changing the signal, the Defendant, while driving along the two-lanes of the above road, did not start from the victim's car in the future and did not depart from the victim's car at the beginning of a water stop in front of the passenger car, thereby obstructing the victim's car path and threatening the victim.

B. In light of the following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, the lower court determined that it is difficult to readily conclude that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone interfered with the victim’s course and threatened the victim with a passenger car as indicated in the facts charged, and that the Defendant was acquitted on the facts charged in the instant case.

(1) It is recognized that Defendant driver’s vehicle (hereinafter “Defendant’s vehicle”) proceeding along the two-lanes and without turning directions, etc., the vehicle was changed to the one-lane in which the victim’s driver’s vehicle (hereinafter “victim’s vehicle”) is driving and proceeding in the future.

However, the Defendant alleged that he changed the vehicle into one lane in order to avoid a vehicle parked at the two-lanes, and that the vehicle was parked at the two-lanes where the Defendant had been driving at the time, and therefore, the vehicle is parked on the part of the two-lanes, as alleged above by the Defendant.