The guilty part of the judgment of the court below of first instance and the judgment of the court below 2 and 3 shall be reversed.

The penalty against the defendant shall be imposed on the defendant 6,00.

1. The first instance court rendered a judgment dismissing a public prosecution pursuant to Article 327 subparag. 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that M expressed his/her intention not to be punished against the Defendant among the facts charged in the instant case (2015No. 43), and that the part became final and conclusive without filing any particular appeal, this part is excluded from the scope of the judgment of this court.

Therefore, the scope of this court's judgment is limited to the conviction part of the judgment of the first instance and the judgment of the second and third court.

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Error of facts (in the judgment of the court of first instance), although the defendant cited a knife and concealeds the knife, the victim did not see the knife, and thus, there is no fact that the defendant threatened the victim in knife.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (No. 1, 2, and 3: fine No. 2,00,000) is too unreasonable.

3. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant ex officio, this Court tried to examine the three cases of appeal by combining the three cases of appeal by the defendant. The crimes of each case deliberated in the trial by the court in question are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and shall be sentenced to a single sentence within the scope of the term of punishment increased by concurrent crimes in accordance with Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. Thus, the judgment of the court below cannot be reversed in its entirety.

However, there is an ex officio reversal in the judgment of the court below 1, 2, and 3 against the defendant.

Even in the judgment of the court of first instance, the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts about intimidation is still subject to the judgment of the court of first instance.

4. The following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court’s judgment on the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts (in the first instance judgment), and evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court, namely, victim D is too adjacent to the lower court’s judgment.