The defendant shall be innocent.

1. At around 21:00 on December 2, 2012, the Defendant threatened the victim by saying, “E, above, the victim D (Woo, 41 years of age) operated by the victim D (Woo) located in Young-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Gyeong-gun, Gyeong-si, Gyeong-si,” the victim stated, “Woo Dok Ga k k k k k k k k k k

2. Determination

A. In the crime of intimidation, the term "Intimidation" means a threat of harm that may generally cause fear to an ordinary person. Thus, the subjective constituent elements of the crime do not require any intent or desire to actually realize the harm that an actor knows and cites to such a degree of harm that is likely to cause fear. However, if the actor's speech or behavior is merely merely an expression of a simple emotional desire or temporary decentralization and it is objectively evident that there is no intent to harm in light of the surrounding circumstances, it cannot be acknowledged as an act of intimidation or a temporary decentralization. Whether there was a intent of intimidation or a threat in the above meaning should be determined by taking into account not only the external appearance of the act, but also surrounding circumstances, such as the background leading to such act and relation with the victim (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 90Do2102, May 10, 191; 2005Do329, Mar. 25, 2005).

B. In light of the following circumstances, the Defendant and the victim met each evidence duly adopted and investigated by this court; ① there was a dispute over several times before and after the entries in the facts charged; ② there was no direct harm to the body of the victim even though the Defendant was punished for dispute over a long time; ③ the victim was sent a warning at the time of his defense counsel’s death (the Defendant) in this court; ③ the victim was sent a warning, and “I am brud that I am at the time of his/her death.”