The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The Defendant is aware of the fact that the victim C (32 tax, female, intellectual disability Grade 3) is a basic recipient and a recipient of disability; and that he/she is a recipient of disability.

After having accessed, he recorded the content that he has repaid his card, from the person who suffered the damage.

1) On July 20, 2016, the Defendant: (a) threatened the victim with the victim’s false statement on the ground that the victim would not have repaid his/her card-related damages; (b) thereby, 80,000 won from the victim who suffered from drinking alcohol, on the ground that the victim would not have repaid his/her card-related damages; (c) by threatening the victim to “I would have the victim be punished by filing a complaint with an investigation agency on the false statement; and (d) would have the victim be punished by the investigation agency.”

2) The defendant under the same year.

8. 8. On August 1, 200, in the ship park located in the river park located in the Si/Gun/Gu, after being aware of the victim's occurrence of 3.5 million won as dental treatment expenses, the victim made a threat to the victim in such a manner as above, and 3 million won was passed from the victim who was frighted to drinking.

3) On October 20 of the same year, the Defendant: (a) 105-dong 909-dong 100,000 won of the E apartment at one’s own home, which was the victim’s “influence to money; and (b) 500,000 won of the 50,000 won of the flusium; and (c) 50,000 won from the

The Defendant, by threatening the victim, 4,300,000 won in total were over three times from the person suffering from drinking, which was frighted.

2. Determination

A. The defendant alleged that he received money from the injured party at the time and place stated in the facts charged. However, this is only the money that the injured party provided to the defendant in good faith at the time, not by intimidation of the defendant.

B. Evidence that conforms to the fact that the defendant threatened the victim is the only record of the police statement against C.

However, the above evidence is without credibility in light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the witness C’s legal statement and the evidence submitted by the Defendant.