All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant (i) stated that J, N, and S, who had access to the site at the time of misunderstanding of facts (Simple intimidation part), had never been seen or heard by the Defendant at all the face of threatening the victim E, and contrary thereto, the victim E’s statement was not reliable as it was based on the Defendant’s counter-defluence as the Defendant filed a criminal complaint against the F, who had engaged in a matrimonial engagement with him and the F, and led the Defendant to a strong marriage with F, and cannot be the proviso for conviction in time and condition between E and F.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty on the basis of E's statement without reasonable grounds is erroneous in misconception of facts.

B. The sentence imposed on the accused (two years of suspended execution in six months of imprisonment, and 80 hours of community service order) on the original judgment of the court below is too unreasonable.

B. The judgment of the court below which acquitted the Defendant of this part of the facts charged, is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles, in light of the following: (a) the victim F made a concrete statement from the investigative agency to the court below; (b) the H and I’s statement correspond to this; and (c) the J, K and L’s statement contrary to this, did not have credibility due to the high probability of a favorable statement to the Defendant as the Defendant’s employees of the company

2. Determination

가. 피고인의 사실오인 주장 부분 원심 및 당심이 적법하게 채택하여 조사한 증거들에 의하여 인정되는 다음과 같은 사정, 즉 ① 피해자 E는 원심법정에서 “2011. 8. 9.경 피고인이 운영하던 주식회사 D 사장실에서 피고인으로부터 협박을 당하였고 당시 사장실에 J, S, N이 들어왔으며 N의 경우 제가 피고인 앞에 무릎끓고 통곡하면서 살려달라고 하는 모습을 목격한 관계로 창피하고 수치심도 느꼈기 때문에 정확히 기억한다”(공판기록 제168쪽)고...