The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Although the gist of the grounds for appeal was that the Defendant sent the text message of this case while disputing the issue of refund with the victim, it is insufficient to view that the Defendant repeatedly sent such text message in light of the background and content thereof, etc.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty is erroneous by mistake of facts or by misunderstanding of legal principles.

2. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, the court below determined that a female victim could have caused fears that the defendant could have suffered harm and harm by finding himself/herself, and therefore, the judgment of the court below to the same purport is just and acceptable. In so doing, it did not err by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

① On May 21, 2017, at around 20:00, the Defendant’s wife received return of the Lone Starbucker’s mold that it purchased at a purchase agency operated by the injured party, and the victim called for the purpose of ascertaining the cause of return, etc. to H around 21:30.

Accordingly, H had the victim take a desire to talk with the victim for the reason that he had made the telephone at the latest time, and the victim did not take the phone again, and the defendant did not take the phone again.

(2) On the same day, the Defendant received a telephone call from the victim before 21:53 on the same day.

Along with the text of “I ambast to ambast, I ambast to ambast.” The victim’s phone call at the latest is the misunderstanding of the text of the “I ambast.”

The return of goods wants to talk that the unilateral speech is not correct.

The reason for return is changed, and why is why it is not rushed.

60 30 30 10 20

I would like to guide the purchase route to the main day.