A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

Seized evidence subparagraph 1 shall be forfeited from the accused.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a person who retired while serving in company E operated by the victim D.

On February 20, 2014, the Defendant filed a lawsuit with the Seoul Northern District Court claiming the amount of KRW 710,010,000 against the victim’s retirement allowance. On February 20, 2014, the Defendant had confidential data against the victim and used them to inform the media, etc. as if the victim was a malicious business owner. In order to raise money from the food victim.

From February 4, 2014, the Defendant: (a) threatened the victim’s cell phone phone to “to have all confidential data of the company; and (b) without paying retirement allowances to the Internet and media; (c) received cash amounting to KRW 50 million from “G” in the “G” coffee shop located in the F of the Government City on March 19, 2014; and (d) attempted to receive KRW 78,50,000 on a total of six occasions from that time, as indicated in the list of crimes in the attached Table.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness D;

1. Records of seizure and the list of seizure;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to documents submitted by a complainant with a written complaint (written evidence, such as a copy of the complaint, text contents, and company document files);

1. Relevant Article 350 of the Criminal Act ( point of conflict), Articles 352 and 350 of the Criminal Act ( point of conflict), and choice of imprisonment with prison labor for the crime;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. The defendant and his/her defense counsel's assertion regarding the defendant and his/her defense counsel under Article 48 (1) 1 of the Confiscation Criminal Act is consistent with the defendant's intent of threatening the defendant to know the victim to a malicious business owner through the Internet, etc., but it is permissible by social norms as it is for the defendant to exercise legitimate rights as a creditor entitled to retirement allowances, etc.