The judgment below

The guilty portion shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

(2) the date of this judgment.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal by defense counsel;

A. There is no direct evidence to prove the facts charged that the defendant had threatened the victim by carrying dangerous articles because the crime of misunderstanding of facts was not discovered and the arrest siren was not discovered.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment by finding the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of intimidation with a deadly weapon, based on the statements made by the victim D and E without credibility.

B. Although this case occurred in the course of receiving the payment of embezzlement damage amount from the injured party, the court below considered the Defendant’s failure to recover the damage to the injured party under the unfavorable circumstances of sentencing. The court below’s sentence that sentenced the community service order for one year, two years, and 120 hours of imprisonment without reducing the amount of punishment is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. We examine ex officio prior to determining the grounds for appeal on the ex officio judgment.

A prosecutor shall make an application for amending the bill of amendment to Article 3(1), Article 2(1)1, and Article 283(1) of the Criminal Act to “Article 284 and Article 283(1) of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act” in the name of the crime in the first instance, “Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a collective deadly weapon, etc.)” in the applicable law as “Special Intimidation,” respectively, and the same court has changed to “Article 284 and Article 283(1) of the Criminal Act.” As such, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained.

However, the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding of facts is still subject to the judgment of this court, even though there are reasons for the above ex officio reversal.

B. In full view of the following circumstances that can be recognized by the lower court’s judgment and the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the first instance court as to the assertion of mistake of facts, the Defendant may be admitted as a threat of the victim by leaving a siren out of the bats.

Therefore, it is true.