The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant was guilty of violating the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Intimidation, etc.) among the facts charged in the instant case by misunderstanding the fact that the Defendant did not have threatened the victim with “to die,” while communicating with the victim, and that he did not have any purpose of retaliation against the Defendant.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (ten months of imprisonment) is unreasonable as it is excessively unreasonable compared to the extent of the Defendant’s responsibility.

2. Determination

A. As to the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts, the court below rejected the above argument in detail under the title of "decision on the argument of the defendant and his defense counsel" in the judgment of the court below as to the same argument as the grounds for appeal in this part. In addition to the circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, the court below's decision that found the defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged is just and acceptable, and there is no error of law by misunderstanding facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment, as alleged by the defendant.

B. The lower court rendered a sentence corresponding to the lower limit of the recommended sentence according to the sentencing guidelines of the Supreme Court while reducing the statutory penalty by taking into account the following circumstances: (a) the nature of each of the crimes in this case is inferior and is committed during the suspension of execution; (b) the Defendant’s fault was committed during the suspension of execution; and (c) the Defendant’s fault was not divided into a part of the crimes; (d) the Defendant deposited the amount of damage to the Defendant with respect to the fraudulent crime; and (e) the victim of the remaining crimes did not want the punishment of the Defendant; and (