특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(보복협박등)등
Part of the lower judgment’s conviction against Defendant B and the part on each of the crimes listed in 2015 and 35 in the judgment.
In the trial of the court below, the prosecutor of the judgment ex officio applied for the amendment of the bill of amendment to the indictment with the content that the victim D and E are changed as stated in the facts constituting a crime after considering the fraud of the victim D and E among the facts charged against the defendant B in the judgment of the court below, and this court permitted it. The part of the judgment below should be sentenced to one punishment in relation to the remaining facts of the crime of the defendant B and the concurrent crimes of Article 37 of the Criminal Act as stated in the judgment of the court below. Thus, the above part of the judgment of the
However, despite the existence of the above reasons for reversal in the lower judgment, the lower court’s assertion of misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal doctrine as to the Defendants of the prosecutor’s violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint intimidation) against the Defendants, and the allegation of unfair sentencing by both parties (as to Defendant B, with respect to each of the crimes listed in 2015 Gohap33, the lower judgment’s judgment is still subject to the judgment by this Court as the grounds for appeal. Therefore,
Judgment on the Reasons for Appeal
A. The prosecutor's assertion of misunderstanding the facts or misunderstanding the legal principles (as to the charge of violating the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint intimidation) against the Defendants in the part of acquittal in the judgment of the court below), as seen earlier, was withdrawn from the prosecutor's assertion of misunderstanding the prosecutor's acquittal of each fraud against D and E as stated in the judgment of the court below
1) The summary of the grounds for appeal corresponds to the Defendants’ act of this part of the grounds for appeal objectively deemed to constitute a threat of harm and injury sufficient to cause fear to the people, and thus, the victim was aware of the purport thereof, and there was a mind from the investigative agency to the court of the court of the lower trial that led to fear by the Defendants.
As long as the Defendants make statements, the crime of intimidation should be deemed to be established.
2) Determination A) The summary of this part of the facts charged is as follows.
Defendants H. H. H.