The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant’s act related to the attempted attempt to commit an offense of intimidation under the Criminal Act, among the facts charged in the instant case alleged by misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, does not constitute intimidation under the Criminal Act.

In addition, the Defendant did not engage in any act of interference with business as described in the facts charged in the instant case, and the Defendant’s act related to the insult among the facts charged in the instant case is not unlawful as a justifiable act.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which convicted all of the facts charged of this case is erroneous by misapprehending the legal principles.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s wrongful assertion of sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the following legal principles and records and arguments, the Defendant’s speech and behavior, such as Paragraph 1 of the facts charged, as stated in the lower judgment, is deemed to constitute intimidation, which is the means of crime of attack, and thus, the Defendant’s assertion regarding the attempted attempt of attack among the facts charged in the instant case is rejected.

Intimidation as a means of the crime of threat refers to the threat of harm and injury that is likely to be hot enough to restrict the freedom of decision-making or interfere with the freedom of decision-making. Bad faith notification is sufficient if it does not necessarily require the method of specification, and it is sufficient to have the other party recognize that it would cause harm and injury to the other party by language or dynamic, and even if it is used as a means of the realization of legitimate right, if the means and method of realizing the right exceed the permissible level and scope in light of social norms, it shall be deemed that the implementation of the crime of threat is commenced. Whether certain act specifically exceeds the permissible level and scope in light of social norms is the subjective aspect and objective aspect of the act, i.e., the purpose and method pursued.