1. The judgment below is reversed.

2. The defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for ten months;

3. However, for a period of two years from the date this ruling becomes final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, as stated in paragraph 2 of the instant facts charged, did not have assaulted the victim, and did not intimidation the victim as described in paragraph 3-A.

However, since the court below found all of the facts charged guilty, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, the defendant assaulted the victim as stated in Paragraph 2 of the facts charged in this case and can be sufficiently recognized the fact that he threatened the victim as stated in Paragraph 3-A. (hereinafter the defendant asserts that the victim's statement is not reliable, but in light of the specific contents and overall circumstances of the victim's statement in the court below, it is determined that the victim's statement is reliable. The part which somewhat differs in each statement in investigative agency and court of the court below is deemed to be a natural phenomenon that appears in the situation or condition of the victim at the time of preparation of the protocol or the victim's ability to memory following the passage of time, etc., and the difference does not appear to be sufficient to reject the credibility of the victim's statement). Accordingly, the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts is without merit.

B. Although the Defendant did not want to continue the relationship with the Defendant, the Defendant committed considerable mental pain to the victim, such as threatening the victim, threatening, and assaulting the victim, even though the victim did not want to do so, due to the Defendant’s act, the victim eventually becomes divorced from the husband. The Defendant’s photograph and photograph suggesting the relationship with the victim through SNS, such as Kakao Stockholm, beyond the victim’s intimidation and violence.