However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Around July 2013, the Defendant became aware of the victim C (the age of 56) who was a customer at the main point in which the Defendant had operated, and has maintained a relationship with the victim from October 2013.

1. On October 2014, the Defendant damaged a remote area equivalent to 600,000 won at the market price of the victim, which is the victim’s possession, by making a scam in color on the wall surface and the wall surface of the inner wall in the south-gu D apartment 101, 1007, which is the victim’s residence.

2. On October 19, 2014, the Defendant: (a) committed theft with one passport owned by the victim and one smart key for the franchise-low passenger vehicle, which was disputing with the victim at a place indicated in paragraph (1) on October 19, 201.

3. From November 11, 2014, the Defendant began to threaten the Defendant to know to the wife, etc. of the victim without giving money when demanding the victim to fully pay the money.

At around 07:00 on November 17, 2014, the Defendant: “Around 07:00, the Defendant, at the place indicated in paragraph (1), told the victim that “I will close the 100 million won in the face-to-face relationship, without notifying the president of the company and the wife of the fact, I will not have access to it; if so, I would not have access to it; and would have to cause a spact-to-face relationship to width until December 24, 2014.” If I would have known the amount of KRW 100,000,000, the Defendant would have caused the victim

The Defendant attempted to attack the victim by the above method and receive KRW 100 million, but did not have the victim's failure to comply with it and did not commit an attempted crime.

4. The Defendant, even though there was no rape, confinement, etc. from the victim, continues to search for the fact that the victim does not request the Defendant to bring about KRW 100 million, on November 27, 2014, on the ground that the Defendant did not “at the Daegu District Court Port Branching Branching Office, which was located in 181, to the North Korean court at the port-si, North Korea on the ground that he/she did not request the Defendant to bring about rape, confinement, etc.”