협박
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. The gist of the prosecutor’s appeal (misunderstanding of the facts and legal principles) is the chairman of the Trade Union of D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D Co., Ltd.”) from the mid-2014, the Defendant negotiated several times with the victim E as the user working on the part of the company with respect to the sale of telecommunications business units of the said company from around the night of December 2014. From around the night of the instant case to the night of this case, the Defendant was able to call the victim and call the victim at night, and called “to put the victim off the knife” and “to throw off the knife”. During the dispute with other employees around 207, the Defendant got off the said employee and got another employee to threaten him on August 19, 2014. In light of the fact that the Defendant’s act of causing harm and harm to the victim as described in the facts charged of this case, the Defendant’s act of causing harm and harm to the victim as a person suffering harm and harm to the victim.
Nevertheless, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to the crime of intimidation by finding the Defendant not guilty of the facts charged in this case on the grounds that the Defendant’s act was merely an expression of emotional humiliation or temporary dispersion and it is difficult to view that the Defendant’s act was not a mere expression of harm to the victim.
2. In the crime of intimidation means a threat of harm and danger to the extent that it would normally cause fear to a person. As such, an intentional act as a subjective constituent element does not require the intent or desire to actually realize the harm and danger that an actor knows and cites to the degree that it would cause such harm and injury.