beta
(영문) 부산지방법원 2015.03.13 2014노4143

공갈등

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

Provided, That the above punishment shall be imposed for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

Reasons

1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the lower court’s punishment (two years of suspended execution for one year of imprisonment, and one hundred and sixty hours of community service order) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination ex officio (as to the crime of intimidation among the facts charged in this case), the absence of the expression of intention not to punish a person subject to punishment, as a so-called passive litigation condition, shall be subject to ex officio investigation. Thus, even if the party did not assert it as a reason for appeal, the court shall ex officio investigate and determine it.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2000Do3172 delivered on April 24, 2001, etc.). A.

The summary of this part of the facts charged is as follows: (a) the Defendant sent to the victim a letter that “the victim requests the payment of borrowed money and the installment of the vehicle, as stated in Paragraph (1) of the facts charged in the judgment of the court below,” and sent to the victim and his wife six times on May 7, 2013, but did not receive the phone number on the same day; and (b) around 03:09 of the same day, the Defendant sent to the victim a letter that “the victim is likely to cause harm and injury to the victim, including the victim’s mobile phone number.”

Therefore, the defendant threatened the victim.

B. B. Prior to the judgment on the grounds of appeal by the Defendant, this part of the facts charged is an offense falling under Article 283(1) of the Criminal Act and cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s express intent under Article 283(3) of the Criminal Act. According to the records, it is recognized that the victim expressed his/her wish not to punish the Defendant on October 30, 2014, prior to the judgment of the lower court, prior to the prosecution of the instant case, at around 09:00, the Defendant expressed his/her wish that he/she would not want to punish the Defendant (e.g., 55 pages and 59 of the trial record). Thus, it either expressed his/her wish not to punish a case that cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s expressed intent or withdrawn his/