가. 피고인( 사실 오인) 피고인이 이 사건 공소사실 기재와 같이 2013. 6. 경 ‘I’ 커피� 및 식당 등에서 피해자를 만나거나 피해자를 협박한 사실이 없음에도, 원심은 사실 오인으로 말미암아 이 사건 공소사실을 유죄로 판단하는 잘못을 범하였다.

B. The prosecutor (unlawful in sentencing) of the lower court’s sentence (2 million won in penalty) is too unhued and unfair.

2. The judgment of the court below as to the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts also asserted the same purport, and the court below rejected the above assertion by giving a detailed statement in the column of "judgment as to the defendant's assertion". In light of the records, the judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and there is an error of law of misunderstanding of facts as alleged by the defendant.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

3. Determination as to the prosecutor's improper assertion of sentencing

A. Based on the statutory penalty, the sentencing is determined within a reasonable and appropriate scope by comprehensively taking into account the factors constituting the conditions for sentencing as stipulated in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, based on which our criminal litigation law, which takes the trial-oriented principle and the principle of directness, has a unique area for the first deliberation of sentencing.

In addition, in light of these circumstances and the ex post facto in-depth nature of the appellate court, it is reasonable to respect the sentencing in the event that there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance does not deviate from the reasonable scope of the discretion. Although the sentence of the first instance falls within the reasonable scope of the discretion, it is desirable to reverse the first instance judgment on the sole ground that the sentence of the first instance falls within the scope of the discretion of the appellate court, and to refrain from imposing a sentence that does not differ from the first instance judgment on the grounds that it is somewhat different from the opinion of the appellate court (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015).