특수협박등
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.
Of the facts charged of this case, the prosecution against assault is dismissed.
Punishment of the crime
On January 29, 2017, the Defendant: (a) heard on January 29, 2017, 2017, around 18:05, that he knows that he would drink alcohol from the victim E; and (b) took a dangerous object from the Defendant’s residence (29cm in total length, 17.5cm in length, 17.5cm in length) as his hand, and made intimidation to “the death of the victim”.
around 06:24, 2017, the Defendant: (a) cut off one cell phone with the market price of KRW 600,000,000, which is one of the mobile phones owned by the victim F, who was set aside next to the Defendant in the Seoul Southern-gu Seoul Southern-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City 111-ro, “Cheongdong Park,” which was 111.
Summary of Evidence
"2017 Highest 2217"
1. Statement by the defendant in court;
1. Statement made by the police for E;
1. Bridges and photographs of the kitchen, "2017 Highest 4004";
1. Statement by the defendant in court;
1. A written statement;
1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on photographs related to damaged articles;
1. The relevant provisions of the Criminal Act regarding criminal facts include: (a) Articles 284, 283(1) (a) of the Criminal Act; (b) Article 329 of the Criminal Act; (c) the grounds for sentencing of a sentence of imprisonment; and (d) the conditions for sentencing as shown in the arguments, such as the Defendant’s age, sex, sex, family relationship, family environment, motive and means of the crime; and (c) the circumstances after the crime.
Unfavorable circumstances: The defendant has already been punished several times due to violent crimes.
The crime of special intimidation in this case requires excessive restriction, which is a dangerous thing for the defendant, and threatens the victim, and is highly dangerous in light of the method of crime.
Furthermore, in light of the fact that the defendant was injured by a person who is a dangerous object in 2014, it is necessary to strictly punish the above crime in light of the fact that the defendant committed the above crime since the probation period was too limited.
In addition, the defendant had already been sentenced to punishment of larceny, but again committed the larceny of this case.
The defendant reflects his wrongness in depth.