특수협박
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts) is merely a stop to communicate with the victim, and the Defendant did not intend to immediately drive or threaten the victim by overtaking the victim.
However, the lower court determined otherwise that the Defendant threatened the victim of the lane.
Since it was recognized, there is an error of mistake of fact.
2. The following circumstances revealed through evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below to the court below’s ruling on the grounds of appeal by the defendant, namely, the victim has consistently maintained until the court below’s ruling: “The victim threatened the victim with the victim by putting away from the front of the victim’s vehicle in front of the victim’s right side while driving away from the front of the victim’s vehicle, and threatening the victim by soundinging the victim’s vehicle up several times, and raising the warning, etc. on several occasions, and then blocking the victim’s vehicle down at the right side of the victim’s stop, and then the signal change from the front of the vehicle, the victim’s vehicle intending to stop, and the victim’s vehicle intending to stop, see the fact that the victim’s vehicle was not able to see the fact that the victim was able to see the fact that the victim was able to see the fact that the victim was able to take away from the front of the victim’s vehicle at the time of leaving away, and that the victim was able to do so without any response to the victim’s statement.