특수협박
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by a fine of 500,000 won.
The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.
1. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor of the gist of the grounds for appeal, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the charges of special intimidation of this case, but acquitted the Defendant.
2. Determination
A. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the prosecutor on the amendment of indictment (in addition to the ancillary charges), the prosecutor maintains ex officio the previous facts charged as to the special intimidation in the trial of the political party as the primary facts charged, and “in the name of the conjunctive crime: Intimidation” in the name of the crime, “Article 283(1) of the Criminal Act” in the applicable law, and “Article 283(1) of the Criminal Act as the facts charged.
The judgment of the court below was no longer maintained, as the facts charged are added to each preliminary charge, and this court permitted it and changed the subject of the judgment.
However, the lower court’s argument that the prosecutor’s mistake of the facts alleged as the primary facts charged is still subject to the lower court’s determination, even if there are grounds for reversal of authority as above. Therefore, the following should be examined.
B. The lower court’s determination on the prosecutor’s assertion of mistake of the facts (as to the primary facts charged) 1) was based on the following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, i.e., “E” only made a statement to the effect that it was an assaulted against A at the time of initial statement at an investigative agency, and did not made a statement to the effect that E was threatened by the Defendant respectively, and ② E was threatened by the Defendant respectively.
The statement was made after about 26 days after the occurrence of the case, and was filed by A due to the fact of injury, and was investigated by an investigative agency as the person's identity. In this case, the statement was assaulted by A with a shouldered brick different from the statement on the day of the case.
It seems that he made a statement and submitted a shouldered brick, etc., and it seems that he made a statement in exaggeration of his damage situations. 3.