Defendant shall be punished by a fine of 200,000 won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won shall be respectively.

1. On September 23, 2011, the Defendant threatened the victim F with the victim F at the parking lot for the E building in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, stating that “this spack will prevent this spack from spacking, spacking, and spacking,” located in the E-building parking lot in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government.

Summary of Evidence

1. Legal statement of witness F;

1. Among the police suspect interrogation protocol against the accused, a man who has sexual intercourse with one another.

A statement (Evidence No. 74 pages), stating that it was true that it was a victim's friendly speech (Evidence No. 117 pages) and that it was an erroneous behavior (Evidence No. 124 pages of Evidence No. 124 pages of Evidence No. 124 of Evidence No. 124)

1. Statement of the police statement concerning F;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to the complaint;

1. Article 283 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime;

1. The portion not guilty of Articles 70 and 69(2) of the Criminal Act for the detention in a workhouse;

1. Facts charged;

A. On May 23, 2011, the Defendant threatened the victim, on May 23, 201, at the office D office of the fifth floor Co., Ltd. of the building E in Gangnam-gu, Gangnam-gu, Seoul, by receiving notification of the head office’s standby order from the victim F, the team leader of the said company’s technical support team, and by threatening the victim, the victim’s “packer’s body”.

B. On September 21, 2011, the Defendant: (a) on September 21, 201, the victim was unfairly dismissed from the said company during the telephone call with F at an unsound place; and (b) on September 21, 201, the Defendant did not only interfere with the victim’s body and mind; (c)

At night, the victim was threatened with the victim at night.

2. In a crime of intimidation means a threat of harm that would normally cause fear to an ordinary person. As such, an intentional act as a subjective constituent element of intimidation is practically realizing the harm that an actor knows and cites to the degree that it would cause such harm.