The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. As to the misunderstanding of facts and the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Intimidation of retaliation, etc.) as stated in the judgment of the court below, there was no fact that the defendant threatened the victim for the purpose of retaliation as stated in the facts constituting a crime.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (three years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Comprehensively taking account of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court regarding the Defendant’s assertion of misunderstanding the facts and misapprehension of the legal doctrine, the Defendant’s intimidation for the purpose of retaliation as stated in paragraph (1) of the crime committed in the lower judgment.

Therefore, the defendant's mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles are without merit.

1) On February 16, 2018, the Defendant: (a) around 18:30 on February 16, 2018, at the Chof house operated by the Victim B (V, 51 years old); (b) the Defendant’s drinking value is high to the victim.

In the case of paragraph (1), the victim was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for one year on August 9, 2018 with respect to the crime of spitation, etc. of eggs, such as spitation, etc. in the victim's face, and completed the execution of the sentence on June 25, 2019.

2) The victim B had visited the victim at C head office operated by the victim on April 28, 2020 by the victim on April 28, 2020 and visited the victim “A head office operated by the victim on April 28, 2020.”

Mebed with a good food.

We will observe the future funeral services.

The death will be discarded.

“Intimidation” and consistent statements (2020 Gohap 14-26, 88-90 pages) were made specifically and consistently (22-26, 88-90 pages) as indicated in the lower judgment) as well as G as the victim of a special assault crime as described in paragraph (2) of the facts constituting the crime of the lower judgment as indicated in paragraph (1) of the same Article, as the victim B’s statement, the Defendant committed the crime of the lower judgment against the victim.