A. The judgment of the court below that found the defendant guilty of the violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint conflict) among the crimes of this case, even though the victim did not have an intention to remove the victim from the vehicle heat or to have the victim deducted from the vehicle heat of the victim, while the victim was unable to contact with the defendant without making payment of the amount of 20 million won or more to the defendant in spite of the victim's liability, and the victim was unable to contact with the defendant.

B. The judgment of the court below on unreasonable sentencing (three million won by fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The court below argues that the testimony of a person who has witnessed or experienced the scene of the crime cannot be rejected without any reasonable ground, and in light of the consistency of each statement that corresponds to the facts of the crime of E, witness witness J, witness J and K, and the attitude of legal statement, etc., each statement is reliable, and there are no reasonable grounds to reject the credibility of the testimony, and the defendant is merely a string to the effect that the victim's refusal to snicke and attempted to leave the match to avoid the snicke. However, the victim E was the victim's hand and the victim's hand son was the key in relation to the debt, and then the victim's hand was the victim's hand and the victim's hand was deducted, and the defendant was also the operator of the C center at the time when the victim took the snicke's desire to do so.