The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

1. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant is the chairman of the labor union D (hereinafter referred to as “foreign company”) and the victim E is the business director of the non-party company.

On April 20, 2015, at around 23:07, the Defendant: (a) sent a phone to the victim locked in the Fcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government F residential area; and (b) expressed that “The Defendant: (c) sent a phone to the victim, knife, knife, G, and boome, flap, flap, flap, flap, flap, flap, flap, and f without flap; and (d) threatened the victim.”

2. Determination and conclusion

A. Intimidation in a crime of intimidation generally refers to a threat of harm that may cause a person to feel fear. Since such subjective constituent elements of intimidation do not require a person’s awareness of and citing that the perpetrator’s perception of and citing such a degree of harm and injury, and do not require any intent or desire to actually realize the harm and injury. However, if the perpetrator’s speech and behavior is merely a mere emotional expression or temporary dispersion and it is objectively evident that the perpetrator has no intent of intimidation in light of the surrounding circumstances, it cannot be acknowledged that the perpetrator’s intent of intimidation or intimidation was objectively acknowledged, but whether there was a threat or intent of intimidation in the above sense should be determined by comprehensively taking into account not only the appearance of the act, but also the circumstances leading to such act, and the relationship between the victim and the victim.

(Supreme Court Decision 90Do2102 delivered on May 10, 1991). B

Comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, it seems that the defendant, who is the chairman of the labor union of the non-party company, was under the influence of alcohol to the victim in charge of the labor union affairs of the non-party company, such as the reduction of half of wages at the time, etc., and the defendant made a phone call to the victim in charge of the labor union affairs of the non-party company under the influence of alcohol, and the victim respondeded to the defendant under the relatively detailed circumstances.