When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

The defendant and the victim B (the age of 22) have been aware of it well.

피고인은 2019. 10. 25. 00:00경 서울 광진구 C에 있는 ‘D’에서, 피해자가 SNS에 올린 사진으로 인해 SNS상에서 다투다가, “닌 어디서 쳐 보이면 죽는다”, “차단했네 병신년이 좆같으면 찔러 죽이면 됩니다. E 계속 일하세요, 니 년 찾는게 더 빠르니깐”, “정신병 있다고 까셨는데 정신병 있는 사람 다신 건들지 못하게 좆되게 해줄게 내 오랜 친구ㅎㅎ” 등의 글을 남겨, 피해자의 신체에 위해를 가할 것처럼 협박하였다.

Summary of Evidence

1. The defendant's partial statement in court (the fact that the statement includes the same article as the fact of crime);

1. The police statement concerning B;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to report internal investigation (referring to places wherein a letter of intimidation is written on SNS);

1. Relevant Article 283 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense and Article 283 (1) of the Selection of Punishment;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The Defendant asserts that there was no intention of intimidation since it was merely an expression of temporary decentralization with the victim at the time of a dispute with the victim, and did not have an awareness of the threat of harm and injury.

Intimidation in a crime of intimidation refers to a threat of harm that may generally cause fear to a person. As such, an intentional act as a subjective constituent element of intimidation refers to recognizing and citing that an actor informss of such harm to such an extent, and the intent or desire to actually realize the harm so notified does not require it. However, if a perpetrator’s speech or behavior is merely an expression of a mere emotional expression or temporary dispersion, and it is objectively evident that there is no intention to harm in light of surrounding circumstances, it is an act of intimidation.