Method of notifying that a crime of intimidation would have a harm or injury.

The act of notifying the harmfulness in the crime of intimidation is ordinarily based on the language, but it is possible, as a case, to inform through the Dong without Hanmadi speech.

Defendant

Attorney Kim Dong-hwan

Daegu High Court Decision 73No361 delivered on August 14, 1974

The appeal is dismissed.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

1. The judgment of the court of first instance maintained by the court below at around 21:00 on October 5, 1972, the defendant acknowledged the fact that the defendant and the victim were deadly in front of the defendant's house located in Doldong-gu Daldong-ri, Doldong-gu, Doldong-gu, and that he returned to his house, the defendant would go to his house because he followed his Dong, who was in his house and was in danger of being held in his house, and threatened the Dong as if he were in the same place, and thereby, he applied Article 3(2) and Article 2(1) of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act to so-called "Article 283(1) of the Criminal Act" to this case.

2. The act of notifying a person of harm to a crime of intimidation would normally be based on a normal language, or, as the case may be, it may also be notified by a person without Han-Madro.

As stated in the above holding, the decision was just and it was not a notice to inflict harm on the body, and thus, it cannot be said that there was no error in the misapprehension of legal principles or incomplete deliberation as to the crime of intimidation, such as the theory of lawsuit, and it cannot be viewed as an attempted injury like the theory. Therefore, the arguments are without merit.

3. If the evidence cited in the above judgment is examined in comparison with the records, it is acceptable to accept the facts stated in the judgment, and it is not possible to find out any illegality that has established the rules of evidence or has mistakenly recognized the facts, and therefore, there is no objection to the contrary, and it is also groundless to discuss the legitimate evidence preparation of the fact-finding court.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Kim Young-chul (Presiding Justice)