The guilty portion shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

The judgment below

Part of acquittal.

A. Defendant 1) The misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of the legal doctrine did not deliver a property with fear due to Defendant’s assault or intimidation.

There is no substantial connection between the assault, intimidation and the delivery of goods by the defendant.

2) Unreasonable sentence of the lower court (two years of suspended sentence for one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor 1) An application for the provisional seizure of real estate prepared by the Defendant by misunderstanding the facts and misunderstanding the legal principles, which was carrying out the business of salted fishing up to November 201.

was written.

The 64 million won remitted to Q Co., Ltd. on July 10, 2012 cannot be viewed as normal cost of purchase of originals.

Although the Defendant did not run the salted business, the Defendant acquired the investment amount of KRW 500 million from the Victim J.

2) The unfair sentencing sentence of the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Determination on the Defendant’s assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles 1) The lower court determined the lower court: (a) the Defendant’s act of demanding the victim to make a high-tension speech and verbal abuse and to lend money; and (b) the victim’s act of attack was a attack; and (c) the victim provided money due to

The recognition was recognized.

Specific reasons for judgment are as follows.

(1) The victim has died of the victim “when the defendant demands that he/she raise funds.”

In other words, there was a threat or threat, and if it is not possible to lend money, it was possible to ice or ice.

On August 17, 2014, there is no day.

One of the false words saw off the clothes, spaw off the shower face, spawn the finger, and spawn it into the spawn, so that the spawn of the spawn, and the spawn caused the escape between the defendant and the view that he had no knowledge.

“The statements consistently made.”

② Examining the details of cell phone text messages sent and received by the Defendant during the period from September 5, 2013 to April 28, 2014, the Defendant is the victim.