A. 14 text messages written in the list of crimes committed in the judgment of the court below, in which the defendant sent a victim of mistake of facts, are sent by the defendant as a lessee to the victim who is a lessor to request the return of the lease deposit. It is not a language that arouses apprehension or fear, but the defendant does not have repeatedly delivered the above text messages to the victim.

B. The sentence (one million won of fine) imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Determination of misunderstanding of facts is subject to the punishment of repeatedly reaching other parties through an information and communications network under Articles 74(1)3 and 44-7(1)3 of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, Etc.. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2013Do7761, Dec. 12, 2013). The issue of whether the term “the act of repeatedly reaching other parties,” as referred to in this context, constitutes “an act of repeatedly reaching other parties,” should be determined by comprehensively taking into account the contents of the language and text sent by the Defendant to the other party, the method and method of expression, the relationship between the Defendant and the other party, the frequency of sending the text, the circumstances before and after, and the situation faced by the other party (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2013Do761, Oct. 28, 2014).