The judgment below

The part of the case of the defendant is reversed.

As to the crimes Nos. 1, 2, and 3 of the judgment of the court below, the defendant shall be sentenced to six months.

1. The court below's scope of trial in this court shall be convicted of the part of the case of the defendant, and dismissed the prosecutor's request regarding the case of the case of the attachment order, and since only the defendant and the person who requested the attachment order (hereinafter "the defendant") filed an appeal regarding the part of the case of the attachment order, the court below's request for attachment order is excluded from the scope of trial in this court, notwithstanding Article 9 (8) of the Act on the Protection and Observation of Specific Criminal Offenders and the Electronic Monitoring, etc.

2. Summary of reasons for appeal;

A. The part of the crime of intimidation (Article 4 of the judgment below) on July 13, 2017, the Defendant, on July 13, 2017, issued the victim a “satisc shop” as the “victim’s private life” on July 13, 2017, stated the victim’s private life in the smoking space. However, there was no threat to the effect that the victim’s private life was disseminated, such as video images, etc., as stated in paragraph (4) of the judgment below.

Nevertheless, the court below found this part guilty, which is erroneous in misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles.

2) On September 6, 2017, the part of the crime of rape (Article 6 of the judgment below) was committed by the Defendant as described in paragraph (6) of the judgment below, and sent N files and text messages recording sexual intercourses between the victim and N. The Defendant did not state that the Defendant was able to spread the victim’s sexual intercourse files and sexually related video images, etc., and the atmosphere was free, and the Defendant was sexually related by agreement between the Defendant and the victim.

Therefore, despite the fact that this does not constitute the crime of rape, the court below held that the defendant threatened the victim to the extent that the victim does not resist the victim.

From this point of view, it is judged that it constitutes the crime of rape.