The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. As the Defendant asked the victim C to prepare a written application for a carbon submitted to the criminal trial by himself/herself, he/she was rejected, and sent the victim a word containing a brue without the subject of appraisal. Therefore, uneasiness and fear of fear to the victim was not caused.

B. In light of the fact that the defendant was detained on another case, and the economic situation is not good, the sentence of the court below (one million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Article 74(1)3 and Article 44-7(1)3 of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, Etc., of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, Etc. concerning the assertion of misunderstanding of facts are normative elements necessary to make an evaluation and emotional judgment. In advance, the term “conscept” is “competing and uneasing” and the term “inscriptive” means “comforing and uneasing” (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Do9581, Dec. 24, 2008). Therefore, when considering a series of acts of the defendant, if it is recognized that the defendant’s act is emotionally evaluated by the victim beyond the degree of harming the peace and peace of the mind, it constitutes the element of the crime above.

The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court, namely, the Defendant continued to send text messages to the victim to the effect that: (a) the Defendant “saved the victim’s body without being saved and saved,” and (b) the victim sent text messages to the Defendant, but the content of the text messages does not appear to be for the purpose of leading a threat to the Defendant’s answer, particularly by stimulateing the Defendant to the effect that “a report to the police is to be made.”