A. (Fact-finding in misunderstanding of facts) The Defendant: (a) in the victim’s residence, the victim provided that “the other party to a telephone has confirmed whether he or she is a male, and if he or she is a male, he or she will die, he or she will die of the male; and (b) there is no fact that threatens the victim with a knife.

Nevertheless, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts and finding guilty of this part of the facts charged.

(b) Sentencing (in original instance: Imprisonment with prison labor for ten months, and confiscation);

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts, a crime of intimidation refers to a threat of harm to the extent of causing fear to an ordinary person. In other words, the content of the harm so notified, namely, the type of legal interests or the subject of enjoyment of legal interests, etc. Therefore, even if a threat of harm, which infringes on the legal interests of the victim himself/herself or his/her relatives or any other third person, is closely related to the victim himself/herself and the content of such harm is sufficient to cause fear to the victim himself/herself (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Do1017, Jul. 15, 2010). 2), a crime of intimidation may be established if the crime of intimidation was committed, and the lower court and the trial court were duly adopted and investigated by evidence, and the victim stated in the police room on the day of the instant case that he/she would return the harm to the victim by taking the victim out his/her dwelling, and then the victim would return the harm to the victim’s ward by taking the victim out his/her dwelling.