폭력행위등처벌에관한법률위반(공동강요)
All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.
1. The act of intimidation under Paragraph 1 of the facts constituting the crime as stated in the judgment of the court below as to the gist of the grounds for appeal is a contingent crime by C alone, and the Defendants did not participate therein
C was not a strong atmosphere until before the shouldering, and the victim did not feel any danger and injury from the Defendants.
Nevertheless, the Defendants conspired with C to threaten the victim to commit an act without any obligation.
The judgment of the court below is erroneous in the misunderstanding of facts or legal principles.
In addition, the sentence of the lower court against one of the Defendants (each fine of KRW 3 million) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. As to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of the legal principles, the following facts are examined: (a) the Defendants and C, as stated in the first instance judgment, were found to be guilty; (b) the Defendants and C, as indicated in paragraph (1) of the criminal facts of the first instance judgment, set up a line-based publication on the street; (c) the Defendants and C continued to hold a twitter for about five hours; (d) C, with a glass bottle, putting the victim a bath or her “in order to have the victim returned to her home to her home to her home to her home to her home to her home to her home to her home to her home to her home to her home to her home to her, and (e) created a dangerous atmosphere, such as: (c) the Defendant’s first she had been in front of her early stage, but C went back to her home to her home to her back, and (e) the victims were unable to her to her home to her home to her as requested.
On the other hand, this part of the crime is not the coercion committed by carrying dangerous articles, but the coercion committed by two or more persons, and even if the Defendants were to have a sudden glass disease, C is a serious intimidation.