1. The sentence against the accused shall be 1,000,000 won;

2. The defendant does not pay the above fine.

Punishment of the crime

At around 22:30 on November 19, 2015, the Defendant: (a) called the phone phone (E) from the victim D ( South Korea, 46 years of age) and talked on the victim D’s mobile phone; and (b) “I want to kill the inner part of the fry,” and “I am to see this talk to the victim’s spouse (the name of the victim’s spouse).”

If we see that "I had today talked about this point," the author's save is hot to save.

“F (the spouse of the injured party)” is a large number of friendships around the face of his/her failure to happyly;

the largest example;

No. 100 Does the money? “The money is less than the first love, and No. 100 Does the Love.”

If the F is neglected by the thickness of the punishment, the author will be all glicks.

SECTION F. F. H. acceptance

“Along with the need to consider G (victim’s hereds) in the human development;

The victim expressed his attitude that “ was likely to cause harm to the victim’s life or body,” and threatened the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of the witness D;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to sound recording CDs or recording records;

1. Relevant Article 283 of the Criminal Act concerning facts constituting an offense, Article 283 (1) of the Criminal Act selection of punishment, and selection of fines;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Determination on the defense counsel and the defendant's assertion under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the Provisional Payment Order

1. The claimed victim, who first threatened or induced the defendant, was under the influence of stress, and the defendant was under the influence of stress, called the victim's phone on the target of alcohol and got the victim to speak in the recording of this case.

In light of the contents of the speech before and after death and the response of the victim, the defendant does not intentionally make a statement to the victim.

2. The term “intimation” refers to the threat of harm and injury likely to be frighten enough to objectively restrict the freedom of decision-making or interfere with the freedom of decision-making (Supreme Court Decision 200. Feb. 8, 2002).