A. The fact that the defendant sent a letter to the victim was not the purpose of retaliation.

B. The sentence sentenced by the court below to the defendant (the imprisonment of eight months and one year) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Determination as to the assertion of fact 1) Determination as to whether there was a purpose of retaliation against the defendant unless there was a confession of the defendant, ought to be made by comprehensively taking into account various objective circumstances, such as the defendant's personal relation with the victim, possibility of expectation of the crime, and circumstances before and after the crime, etc. (hereinafter "providing the proviso to investigation"), the contents and degree of disadvantage suffered by the defendant due to the defendant's response to the investigation or trial, changes in attitude during the investigation process, provision of the proviso to investigation, etc., the circumstances leading up to the crime committed by the defendant and the victim at the time of the crime, surrounding environment, such as the time and place of the crime, etc., the method and method of the crime, the contents and form of the crime, the provision of the proviso to investigation, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 201Do9030, Sept. 26, 2014).

6. In the appellate trial on November, 199, the facts that were detained until now after being sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for one year and three months (No. 917, Changwon District Court Decision 2015No. 2017) (hereinafter “related cases”), and the defendant and the defendant have been detained for the above-related cases and are threatened with the victim for the purpose of retaliation at least 12 times between four months from the date of being detained to the date of the appellate judgment