All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. 1) The Defendant did not misunderstanding the facts against the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Refluoring intimidation, etc.) or threaten the victim D.

2) The Defendant who injured the Victim H was assaulted by the Victim H while defending the Victim H, and was in excess of the floor with the Victim H, and did not leave the Victim H face.

3) The Defendant did not assault the Victim N.

The injury suffered by the victim was assaulted by S, and only the victim was abused by S and found in the defendant's residence.

B. Sentencing of the original judgment (the first instance judgment: imprisonment with prison labor for a year and six months, and the second instance judgment: imprisonment with prison labor for a period of four months) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts, the first instance court rendered a judgment of the first instance court on the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Retaliatory, etc.) No. 1

The recognition was recognized.

Specific reasons for judgment are as follows.

(1) A victim stated the fact of damage specifically and consistently in an investigative agency and the first instance court.

② In the investigative agency and the first instance court, H, the Defendant’s seat, at least 12 times the day of the instant case, the Defendant should not have “E convenience store’s seat.”

See the phrase “....”

“The statement was made to the effect that it was “.”

(3) The defendant seems to have been given considerable bad faith to the victim due to the past records of having been sentenced two times with regard to the victim.

④ On July 22, 2015, the Defendant was released from the Suwon detention center, and on July 29, 2015, on July 29, 2015, the Defendant’s finding of convenience points operated by the victim was deemed to have been the primary reason for retaliation against the victim.

B) Examining the evidence duly adopted and examined by the first instance court and the first instance court, the lower court’s judgment and the first instance court, “The Defendant threatened the Defendant for the purpose of retaliation.”

“The victim’s statement is reliable.”

This title 1.