The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts) is that the Defendant sent each of the instant text messages sent by the Defendant to the victim, i.e., 13 times a day or 9 times a day. Thus, the Defendant’s sending of the Defendant’s text messages constituting a series of repeated acts.

In addition, the defendant sent a text message to a school where a private individual is working at an elementary school or to file a civil petition to a school, and the victim also sent a text message to the defendant, but the victim pointed out that it is unreasonable for the content of the text message sent by the defendant, or send it by the defendant.

In full view of the fact that the Defendant borrowed the contents of the text message and took advantage of the Defendant’s public interest, and the Defendant continued to send the text message to the victim during that period, each of the instant text messages sent by the Defendant constitutes a language that arouses fear or apprehension to the victim.

2. The lower court found the Defendant not guilty on the ground that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone was insufficient to recognize that the Defendant’s act constituted a series of repeated acts to arouse fear and apprehensions to the victim through the information and communications network, and that there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

The above judgment of the court below is just in light of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the reasoning of the court below.

Therefore, the prosecutor's assertion that the judgment of the court below that acquitted the defendant of the facts charged of this case is erroneous is without merit.