If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

On June 2, 2015, the Defendant: (a) applied the mobile phone Kakao Stockholm program to the victim using the mobile phone “Kakao Stockholm” program at a place in the French place on June 2, 2015; (b) whether the victim made such a creation and made a decision to

We need to see the spirit of the foot in this part.

In addition to sending the text message, “” sent 9 times from June 2, 2015 to June 19:20 on June 2, 2015, 2015, 40 times from around 17:47 to June 20, 2015, and from around 12:02 on August 2, 2016 to August 9:36, 2016, the text message sent 40 times to the victim’s humiliation and danger.

By doing so, the Defendant reached the other party repeatedly through the information and communications network the text that arouses fear or apprehension.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a criminal investigation report (for the Kakao Stockholm message submitted by the victim, the case);

1. Article 74 (1) 3 and Article 44-7 (1) 3 and Article 44-7 (1) 3 of the Act on Promotion of Utilization of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, etc., concerning facts constituting an offense;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Determination on the assertion by the Defendant and his defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The assertion;

A. It is difficult to view that the content of the text message in the attached Table No. 1 (hereinafter “the instant text message”) sent by the Defendant to the victim is merely a warning to the effect that the content of the Defendant’s assertion related to the outcome of the formation requirement (hereinafter “instant text message”) is “any other unlawful act.” Of the above text message, it is difficult to deem that the Defendant’s fear or apprehension was caused to the victim. Of the text message, it cannot be deemed that the text message in the instant case of June 2, 2015 was merely 9.

B. The promotion of the use of information and communications networks and arguments related to justifiable grounds (hereinafter “second assertion”).