2. The judgment of the defendant recognized the crime of this case and reflects it, and it is favorable to the defendant that there is no criminal record of exceeding the fine, except for one case before the suspension of execution due to the crime of escaping from military service in 190.

However, the Defendant’s crime of this case was committed by intimidationing a female-friendly job victim who was committed during the commission of the crime of this case, photographing the victim with exemption from the charge of drinking, continuing to demand sexual intercourse with the victim, threatening the victim as if he were to spread it, and posting the Defendant’s physical photograph, etc. on the Defendant’s account protocol of Kakao Stockholm.

The victim suffered from fear that not only physical pain but also sexual impulses and dynamic images may spread due to the defendant's crime, and these mental impulses seems not to be easily visible.

The defendant was unable to receive a letter from the victim.

These circumstances are disadvantageous to the defendant.

In full view of the following circumstances: (a) there is no particular change in the sentencing conditions compared with the original judgment, as the new sentencing data was not submitted in the trial; (b) the Defendant’s age, criminal records, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, motive and circumstance of the crime, etc.; and (c) the sentencing guidelines for the enactment of the Supreme Court’s Sentencing Committee, etc., it is not recognized that the lower court’s sentencing was too excessive and exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.