A. As to the special intimidation against the victim D by mistake of fact, it was true that the defendant expressed the victim D at the time of the instant case, but the defendant taken the knife.

Although there was no intimidation, the judgment of the court below that found this part of the facts charged guilty is erroneous by misunderstanding the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the defendant taken the knife of the victim D with the roof as stated in the court below's decision.

Since the defendant's above assertion is without merit, it can sufficiently recognize the facts of intimidation.

B. Although there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the original judgment, such as the fact that the victims of the wrongful sentencing have agreed smoothly with the victims and the defendant, there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the original judgment, such as the submission of new sentencing data in the first instance court. Each of the crimes of this case is highly dangerous, each of the crimes of this case is a crime using a knife, and commits each of the crimes of this case at another time without being aware of the repeated crime period due to fraud, etc., and other circumstances, which are conditions for the sentencing indicated in the records, such as character, character, environment, age, motive and circumstance of the crime, means and consequence of the crime, relationship with the victims, and the situation after the crime, etc., it is not recognized that the sentence imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.