협박등
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.
The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.
1. As to the summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of the legal principles), promotion of the use of information and communications networks and violation of the Act on Information Protection, etc., the Defendant sent letters to the victim as stated in the crime sight table as stated in the judgment below, but rather, the victim sent more intimidation to the Defendant, etc., in light of the fact that the letter sent by the Defendant
shall not be deemed to exist.
On the point of intimidation, although there was a fact that the defendant found the body of the victim, there was no threat of the victim, and there was no threat of the victim because the defendant's arrival was immediately the police's arrival.
Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found Defendant guilty of each of the facts charged in this case as evidence of credibility C’s statement, etc. is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles.
2. Determination
A. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for an ex officio appeal, the prosecutor applied for permission to amend the Bill of Amendment to Bill of Indictment in the facts charged regarding intimidation in the trial of the party, “as of September 12, 2015, around 17:00,” “as of September 12, 2015,” and as of September 12, 2015, the court permitted it and changed the subject matter of the judgment, the lower judgment is no longer maintained.
On the other hand, the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding the above facts and misunderstanding the legal principles is still subject to the judgment of this court, and the above provision is modified.
B. The following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court’s determination as to the assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal doctrine are: (i) the victim’s statements made in the investigative agency and court of the lower court are specific and consistent; (ii) the victim’s text and text, time and frequency of sending letters to the victim; and (iii) the victim is likely to feel fear and uneasy;