beta
(영문) 전주지방법원 2012.10.31 2012고정601

공갈미수

Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. The Defendant was an employee of C, a representative director, who was the victim C.

As of September 22, 2011, the Defendant thought to receive monthly pay, early voluntary retirement, etc., for which the Defendant did not receive any complaints regarding the unfair dismissal from the said company.

On September 201, the Defendant made a telephone call to the victim on the last day of September, 201, and threatened the victim that “I would make 50 million won of retirement allowance known to the company secret and keep it in news without being paid retirement allowance, and accused the Korea Labor Agency.”

Although the Defendant aided the victim, the Defendant did not comply with it and did not commit an attempted crime.

B. At around 09:21 on November 3, 201, the Defendant: (a) used the Defendant’s mobile phone (F) Efudio 209 on the mobile phone (H) Kakaoxox of G, a staff member near the nearest side of the victim, to deliver to the victim the word “The receipt to the Ministry of Labor is three months’ benefits and wages payment, i.e., 690 = 115=8050,000,000,000 in the Ministry of Labor - if the lawful comments are received; (b) would only be the members of G are aware of the fact that he knows in the news, but even if the date is unknown, he/she sent to the victim a intimidation.”

Although the Defendant aided the victim, the Defendant did not comply with it and did not commit an attempted crime.

2. Determination

A. Although there is evidence of the facts charged as to this part of the facts charged under this part of the indictment, C’s police and legal statement were made, C, while stating that he had conversations with the Defendant during the morning on September 201, 201 and had a large volume of voice after hearing the horses of the Defendant, was unable to memory at any time and where he/she had received the phone, and what was the specific telephone content, C, which was submitted to the Jeonju District Public Prosecutor’s Office on December 20, 201, did not state that he/she received the phone from the Defendant as shown in the above facts charged.