The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The gist of the grounds of appeal is that the Defendant, at the time of the instant case, was not influenced by the victim, and there was no fact of assaulting the victim, and there was no fact of intimidation.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found all of the facts charged of this case guilty is erroneous by misunderstanding facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. The victim has consistently stated in the investigative agency and the court that the victim was in danger of the victim, and consistently stated that the Defendant was imprisoned with the victim, and that the victim threatened the victim.

In addition, the defendant and the victim's son stated that they witness in investigation agencies and courts, and that the defendant had a view to threatening the victim due to the loss of the victim.

The above statements are specific and clear, and there is no circumstance to suspect the credibility thereof.

The court below's finding all of the charges of this case guilty on the ground of the above evidence is just and there is no error of mistake of facts.

However, among the evidence adopted by the court below, the protocol of interrogation of the suspect prepared by investigation agency other than the public prosecutor under Article 312 (3) of the Criminal Procedure Act can be admitted as evidence only when the defendant or defense counsel who was the suspect recognizes the contents of the protocol.

In addition, "when the content is recognized" in the above provision means not that the contents of the protocol of suspect interrogation are written as stated, but that such statement conforms to the actual facts.

If the defendant denies the facts charged continuously since the court of first instance, it is understood that even if the defendant was written in the evidence list as recognizing the contents of the protocol of interrogation prepared by the police, it was wrong to correct the protocol by recognizing the facts that the defendant stated or stated as such. Accordingly, the above protocol of interrogation of the suspect is admissible as evidence.