beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. The gist of the grounds for appeal (the grounds for appeal filed by the defense counsel for the factual errors on October 26, 2016 stated the grounds for appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing as the grounds for appeal. However, such grounds for appeal may not be legitimate grounds for appeal, since a state appointed defense counsel files an appeal after the lapse of 20 days from the date of receipt of the record ( September 22, 2016).
A. The Defendant’s text message that attempted to proceed was sent as part of the lawful exercise of the right to collect the assignee’s claim, and there was no other fact that the Defendant’s body or property was harmful to the victim’s body or property, and there was no intention to instigate money by threatening the victim.
B. In the part of the Defendant’s violation of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection (Defamation), this article did not aim to slander the victim as it concerns the public interest for protecting ordinary investors by notifying the victim’s price manipulation.
2. Determination:
A. Intimidation as a means of the crime of intimidation partial threat means a threat of harm and injury likely to be frighten to restrict the freedom of decision-making or interfere with the freedom of decision-making. The threat of harm and injury is sufficient if it does not necessarily require the method of specification, and it would lead the other party to a certain harm and injury. Even if it is used as a legitimate means of realizing the right, if the means and method of realizing the right exceed the permissible level and scope under the social norms, even if it is used as a legitimate means of realizing the right, it shall be deemed that the crime of threat was commenced. Here, whether certain act exceeds the permissible level and scope under the social norms should be determined by comprehensively taking into account the subjective and objective aspects of the act, namely, the purpose and method selected as a whole.
(See Supreme Court Decision 94Do2422 delivered on March 10, 1995, see Supreme Court Decision 94Do2422 delivered on March 10, 199).