The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Comprehensively taking account of the details, contents, frequency, etc. of the sending of the message sent by the Defendant, it cannot be deemed that the text that arouses fear or apprehension reaches the other party repeatedly, and the Defendant did not have an intention to arouse fear or apprehension to the other party.

나. 피고인은 자신의 얼굴을 피해자 얼굴 가까이 들이댔을 뿐인데 이에 대해 피해자도 자신의 얼굴을 가까이 들이대면서 두 사람의 이마가 닿게 된 것이고 이마가 닿은 강도도 강하지 않았으므로, 피고인은 상해의 고의가 없었고 피고인의 행위와 피해자의 상해 사이에 인과관계도 없다.

C. In light of the fact that the Defendant had suffered a large loss but failed to listen to appropriate harm, resulting in a contingent crime, and that there were some errors on the part of the victim, the sentence of the lower court (2 million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Determination on the violation of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, Etc. (1) 3 and Article 44-7(1)3 of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, Etc. (see, e.g., Constitutional Court en banc Decision 2014Hun-Ba434, Dec. 29, 2016) refers to “a series of acts transmitting a text that may cause fear of being biased and uneasible to the general public in light of social norms, and without speaking,” which refers to “a series of acts transmitting a text that may cause a sense of early and early fear,” which is punished under Articles 74(1)3 and 44-7(1)3 of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2014Hun-Ba434, Dec. 29, 2016).