Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

On June 16, 2016, the Defendant filed a complaint, accusation, or report with the president D and BF on the forged facts of private documents at the E C’s Sshyang Factory Office operated by the victim D, and the Defendant filed a complaint, accusation, or report with the president D and BF on the forgery of private documents.

“A statement of grounds for objection to an order to return to work” written as “ shall be submitted to the said company, and on June 2016, G calls from the company’s former office F and telephone from the company, and “a factory shuts down due to a forged private document issued by the Japanese H company, a trading office,” and “a factory shuts down by the Japanese H company, a trading office.”

The phrase " was frightened."

On July 5, 2016, the Defendant was transferred KRW 5,340,00 to the Busan Bank Account (Account Number: I) in the name of the Defendant on July 5, 2016 from the victim, the representative director of the above E, and the former F, who threatened the victim and the latter.

Accordingly, the defendant received property by threatening the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Each legal statement of witness D and F;

1. A copy of a statement of grounds for appeal against an order to return work;

1. A copy of a written agreement or a copy of the original written agreement;

1. Recording (A-F) [referring to a threat of harm and injury as a means of a crime of intimidation that may objectively restrict the freedom of decision-making or interfere with the freedom of decision-making, taking into account specific circumstances into account, which may cause harm and injury to a person, even if the notice is not illegal (see Supreme Court Decision 2000Do4415, Feb. 23, 2001, etc.). In cases where the notice of harm and injury was given to the other party as part of the exercise of the right or the execution of the duty, if the notice of harm and injury does not go against the social norms as a legitimate exercise of the right or the execution of the duty, it does not constitute intimidation. However, even if the notice of harm and injury appears to be a legitimate exercise of the right or the execution of the duty, it constitutes intimidation if it actually constitutes abuse of the right or the execution of the duty and if it can be deemed that the notice of harm and injury can be a reasonable means for a legitimate purpose.