The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant misunderstanding of facts does not dispute only the crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (definite intimidation, etc.), and does not dispute the remainder of the crime of interference with and insult against each business.

On March 28, 2018, the Defendant sought a victim to enter into an additional agreement on the offense of insult upon the solicitation of the national defense counsel. However, the Defendant only reported the victim’s behavior to take a photograph of Boli-Mano, and did not threaten the victim for retaliation.

B. The punishment sentenced by the court below against the defendant (two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Determination 1 on the assertion of mistake of facts) The Defendant also asserted the same purport in the lower court’s judgment. As to this, the lower court held that: (a) the Defendant continued to interfere with the business of the victim; (b) the Defendant was arrested as a flagrant offender upon the victim’s report; and (c) it appears that he/she had good appraisal against the victim as it was subsequently prosecuted; and (b) the Defendant found the main points operated by the victim on March 28, 2018; and (c) found the Defendant at the main points operated by the victim on March 28, 2018.

I would like to find out and continue to do so.

“Intimidation”, 3. The victim was unable to listen to the above remarks from the Defendant.

In light of the fact that: (a) the Defendant stated that he was indicted for an insulting offense on January 24, 2018; and (b) the Defendant found the main points operated by the victimized person on March 16, 2018, which was before the crime in this part, and obstructed the work of the injured party; and (c) did not request the injured party to reach an agreement at the time; and (d) the Defendant made a intimidation as described in this part of the facts charged, it can be sufficiently recognized that he made such intimidation to the injured party for the purpose of

The decision was determined.

2) e.g.