The judgment below

The acquittal portion of the guilty part and the victim E shall be reversed.

Defendant

A.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendants 1) 1 and misunderstanding of legal principles as to each guilty part of the judgment of the court below. ① As to each public conflict as stated in the judgment of the court below, the court where the defendants work for the defendants (hereinafter “instant newspaper company”).

(3) Each company listed as the victims is also obligated to pay advertising fees to a press company, and the newspaper company of this case also received ordinary advertising fees as in the same manner as other media companies. Therefore, the Defendants’ demand for advertising fees cannot be deemed to fall under “Intimidation” beyond the socially acceptable range. (2) The statement made by AC public relations team T from the actual person in charge of the execution of AC advertising is nothing more than hearsay evidence as stated in the judgment of the court below. (3) The statement made by the Defendants to AC public relations team T is nothing more than hearsay evidence as stated in the judgment of the court below on the fact that the Defendants made a statement to AE by the actual person in charge of the execution of the AC advertising (No. 3 of the crime day table in the original judgment) as stated in the judgment of the court below. (6) The statement made by AE public relations team staff member of the AE public relations team from the actual person in charge of the execution of the AE advertising is nothing more than the article made by the Defendants in the judgment of the court below.

AH shall execute advertising fees for more than 20 enterprises every year.