If the defendant does not pay the above fine, the amount of KRW 100,000 shall be paid.

1. 모욕 피고인은 2018. 3. 13. 14:20경 서울 강남구 B건물 사무실에서 피해자 C이 피고인의 뒷담화를 하고 다녔다는 이유로 피해자와 같은 모임 친구인 D이 초대된 E 채팅방에서 피해자에게 "썅년아, 좆같은 년, 걸레 같은 년, 더런 년, 병신 허튼 년" 이라고 채팅을 하여 공연히 피해자를 모욕하였다.

2. The Defendant threatened the victim for the same reason, stating, “The victim shall be punished by tamper’s imprisonment, tamper’s imprisonment, and tacker’s imprisonment, and tacker’s imprisonment.” In doing so, the Defendant threatened the victim on the same ground.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Police suspect interrogation protocol of the accused;

1. Statement to C by the police;

1. As to the fact of intimidation, the Defendant’s expression as stated in the facts charged is true, or it is objectively apparent that there is no intention to realize harm, and thus, the crime of intimidation is not committed.

Intimidation in a crime of intimidation refers to a threat of harm to such an extent that may cause a person to feel a threat. As such, an intentional act as a subjective constituent element does not require any intent or desire to actually realize the harm that an actor knows and cites to such an extent that the perpetrator knows that he/she has a threat of harm to such an extent. However, if it is objectively evident that the perpetrator’s speech or behavior is merely a mere emotional expression or temporary expression of labor, and it is objectively evident that he/she has no intent to cause a threat in light of the surrounding circumstances, it cannot be recognized as an act of intimidation or intimidation, but whether there was a threat or intent of intimidation in the above sense is not only an external appearance of the act, but also the circumstances leading to such act, and the relationship between the victim and the victim.