A. Defendant 1) Although there is no credibility of the victim’s statement that the Defendant did not inform the victim of the content of intimidation, and that the Defendant was threatened by the Defendant, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding the facts. (2) The sentence of the lower court (one hundred months of imprisonment and two years of suspended execution) is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence of imprisonment (ten months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution) is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In light of the contents of the first instance judgment regarding the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts and the evidence duly examined by the first instance court, unless there exist special circumstances to deem that the first instance judgment on the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance was clearly erroneous, or in view of the result of the first instance court’s examination and the result of additional evidence examination conducted until the closing of argument in the appellate court, the appellate court cannot reverse the first instance judgment solely on the ground that the first instance judgment on the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance is different from the appellate court’s judgment (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2008Do7917, Nov. 30, 2009; 2006Do4994, Nov. 24, 2006; 2013Do5029, Sept. 12, 2013), and thus, it is consistent with the lower court’s judgment to deem that the victim’s testimony made by the Defendant was clearly admissible from an investigative agency.

The defendant's assertion of mistake is without merit.

(b) the defendant;