In light of the relationship between the Defendant and the victim, the timing of distributing the instant text, the process of election, the contents and method of expression, the circumstances in which the Defendant received the instant text, etc., the lower court acquitted the Defendant on the facts charged of this case on the grounds that there was a misunderstanding of facts or misapprehending of legal doctrine.

Judgment

The summary of the facts charged is the occupant of the Busan Southern-gu apartment complex C, and D performed the community facility construction work in the above apartment complex, and there was a dispute in relation to the delay of the above construction.

D’s director, E used the cell phone Kakao Stockholm on November 2015, and used it for the delay of the above construction, “technical director (victim F)” was often used to waive the construction work. During the construction work, technical director has been obstructed by a person. During the construction work, technical director has used materials indicated in specifications and has been doing so without any delay, but at the beginning, it was demanded to change materials. In addition, there was a situation where it was no choice but to increase the construction cost and construction cost in his own way by asserting the monthly right that he performs the supervision, compelling low-income companies to perform construction work in the way of his own way, and compelling low-income companies to do so. At the end, he requested to use the company as the construction work, and this was demanded to set an urgent amount of air and to recognize it as a private person, and made cooperation, and the Defendant prepared a request for progress payment that includes funds and material costs, and made it possible to pay the Defendant a direct demand for the commencement of construction work.”

On November 22, 2015, the Defendant used a mobile phone at his own home to use the mobile phone, G, H, I, J, K, K, L, M, N, andO.