The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The judgment of the court below that recognized a crime of violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint intimidation) even though the defendant sent text messages to the victim or expressed a desire as stated in the judgment of the court below, there is an error of mistake of facts.

B. The Defendant merely issued a decoration to the victim, which does not constitute intimidation under the Criminal Act, or cannot be said to have an intention to threaten the Defendant, and the Defendant did not have any intent to process the Defendant’s act of intimidation against Co-Defendant B and A (hereinafter “B”) in the original judgment.

Even if a defendant's act constitutes a constituent element of intimidation, it is justified as an act that does not go against social norms. Thus, the court below's decision that recognized the defendant a crime of violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint intimidation) is erroneous in misunderstanding of legal principles.

C. The sentence (one million won of fine) imposed by the court below on the defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) Determination on the assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles as to the existence of a crime of intimidation, which is generally required for the establishment of a crime of intimidation, is a threat of harm sufficient to cause fear to the person who has become the other party. Determination of whether it constitutes a threat of harm or injury ought to be made by comprehensively taking into account various circumstances before and after the act, such as the offender and the other party’s tendency, surrounding circumstances at the time of notification, relationship and status between the offender and the other party, and the degree of friendship (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2007Do606, Sept. 28, 2007). 2) In full view of the following circumstances recognized by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, the judgment of the court below that recognized the defendant as a criminal liability for a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act