특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(보복협박등)
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. According to the summary of the grounds for appeal (in fact-finding and misapprehension of legal principles), the court below found the Defendant not guilty of each of the facts charged of this case on the ground that the Defendant did not constitute intimidation or was not derived from the purpose of retaliation, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment, by misapprehending the legal principles, even though the Defendant could sufficiently recognize the fact at the time of committing each of the crimes committed on January 21, 2013 and June 14, 2013.
2. Determination:
A. In the crime of intimidation in the relevant legal doctrine, the term “Intimidation” refers to the notification of harm to the extent that it may cause a person to feel a threat. As such, the subjective constituent elements of the crime do not require the offender’s intent or desire to actually realize the harm that the perpetrator knew and citing that the perpetrator knows that the perpetrator knows the harm to such an extent. However, if the perpetrator’s speech or behavior is merely merely an expression of a mere emotional expression or temporary dispersion, and it is objectively evident that the perpetrator has no intention of harm in light of the surrounding circumstances, it cannot be acknowledged that the perpetrator’s intent of intimidation or temporary dispersion is not acknowledged.
However, the issue of whether there was the intent of intimidation or intimidation should be determined by comprehensively considering the surrounding circumstances such as the appearance of the act as well as the background leading to such act and the relationship with the victim.
B. (See, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Do329, Mar. 25, 2005).
On January 21, 2013, the first instance court’s judgment of the first instance court on (1) based on each legal statement of K and M, although it is recognized that the Defendant had expressed a desire to the same contents as the facts charged to the victim, the Defendant’s act is the victim in light of the circumstances acknowledged by the record.