The defendant shall be innocent.

1. On October 12, 2017, the Defendant: (a) around 18:30 on October 12, 2017, on the road in front of the building B, the Defendant: (b) stated that DSS5 vehicles driven by the victim C from the front line of the building B, which were driven by the victim C, were fasted while leaving the front line from the first line to the second line; (c) said, the Defendant: (d) stated that the vehicle driven from the vehicle from the vehicle to the victim while leaving the vehicle from the vehicle to the victim, “ception and driving immediately as soon as possible”; and (d) threatened the victim by having the driver’s seat window unloaded once

2. Determination

A. The burden of proving the facts constituting an offense prosecuted in a criminal trial is imposed on the public prosecutor, and the conviction of guilt is based on the evidence with probative value sufficient for a judge to have a reasonable doubt that the facts charged are true, so long as there is no such evidence, the suspicion of guilt against the defendant is doubtful even if there is no such evidence.

Even if there is no choice but to judge the interests of the defendant.

(1) “Intimidation” as required for the establishment of a crime of intimidation under Article 283 of the Criminal Act refers to the threat of harm and danger to the extent of causing fear to a person who has become the other party. In general, the determination of whether such threat and injury constitutes a threat of harm and injury ought to be made by comprehensively taking account of various circumstances before and after the act, such as the offender and the other party’s tendency, surrounding circumstances at the time of notification, relationship and status between the offender and the other party, degree of friendship, etc.

(Supreme Court Decision 201Do10451 Decided August 17, 2012). B.

Judgment

Examining the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court in light of the aforementioned legal doctrine, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone constitutes a threat of harm and injury sufficient to the extent that the Defendant’s act, such as the facts charged, would generally cause fears required for the establishment of the crime of intimidation.

(b).