The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts) is without prejudice to the victims of knife, as stated in the judgment below, as stated in paragraph 1 of the facts constituting the crime.

2. Determination

A. In order to establish a crime of intimidation, the content of the harm and injury notified must be sufficient to cause fear to ordinary people, considering various circumstances before and after the act, such as the behavior’s tendency, surrounding circumstances at the time of notification, and the degree of friendship and status between the perpetrator and the other party. However, as long as the other party has recognized its meaning by notifying the harm and injury, the other party shall not be required to feel feel realistically. As long as the other party has recognized its meaning, regardless of whether the other party has generated actual fear, its constituent elements shall be interpreted to be met and the length of the crime of intimidation (see Supreme Court Decision 2007Do606, Sept. 28, 2007). In addition, the act of notifying harm and injury in the crime of intimidation is ordinarily based on ordinary language, or where it is possible to make a statement to the effect that it is not a threat to harm and injury (see Supreme Court Decision 74Do27279, Oct. 7, 1975; Supreme Court Decision 2009Do5469, Feb. 16, 2009).

However, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, i.e., victim G consistently from the investigative agency to the court of the court below, and consistently “the victims including them drink in a narrow room in the restaurant,” but the defendant opened a door.

The Defendant cited beer and beer with beer and beer, but lids of beer and beer and lids of beer and lids of beer and beer on the table.