beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Although the defendant sent text messages, such as the statement in the facts charged, it is merely merely an emotional expression, not a threat, and there was no intention of intimidation against the defendant, as it does not constitute a threat.
B. The sentence of unfair sentencing (six months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, etc.) by the lower court is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. In order to establish a crime of intimidation, a crime of intimidation in a judgment of misapprehension of legal principles refers to notifying a person of harm to the extent that it may cause fear, and there is a concrete notice of harm to the extent that it may at least be deemed possible to cause fear, and there is a notice of harm and injury.
Even if the crime of intimidation is not established if it is to the extent acceptable by social norms in light of the custom and ethical concept of society, etc., however, whether there was an intentional act of intimidation or intimidation in such meaning should be determined by considering not only the external appearance of the act, but also the circumstances leading to such act, and the relationship with the victim.
(2) In light of the aforementioned legal principles, the Defendant was aware of the victim’s occurrence of the instant case from May 5, 201 to May 13, 2011. In light of the aforementioned legal principles, the following facts or circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Do329, Mar. 25, 2005; Supreme Court Decisions 201Do2412, May 26, 2011; 3. The Defendant was aware of the victim through the Internet page; 1.5. The Defendant first met the victim on May 5, 2018, which was one month prior to the occurrence of the instant case; 2. The Defendant and the victim were able to enter into a sex relationship with the Defendant on several occasions from May 5, 2018 to May 13, 2018; and 3. the victim was aware of the Defendant from the end of May 18, 2018.