The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant shall be innocent.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The victims under paragraphs 1, 2, and 3 of the facts constituting the crime in the judgment of the court below by misapprehending the legal principles are mutually different persons, and the date and time of the crime differs one year and three months.

Defendant sent text messages to Victim G

As to the above part 1 and 2 of the aforementioned provision that he/she attempted to receive property by informing the victim of bad faith, it is difficult to find out whether the defendant requested to deliver any property or pecuniary benefits by notifying the victim of any harm because the content of the text message sent by the defendant to the victim is too abstract or abstract.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (2 million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The relevant legal doctrine 1) Intimidation as a means of threat means the threat of harm and injury likely to be frighten to the extent that it limits the freedom of decision-making or interferes with the freedom of decision-making. The realization of harm and injury notified here does not necessarily require that it is unlawful, and even if the threat is used as a means of realizing the right, if it is a case where the threat is used as a means of realizing the right, the other party is frighten by means of intimidation, and the method of exercising the right exceeds the permissible level or limit under the social common sense (see Supreme Court Decision 2007Do6406, Oct. 11, 2007). 2) If it is not necessarily required that the threat of harm and injury in the crime of extortion be made by means of a clearly specified method, and if it is possible to have the other party be aware that it would incur any harm and injury by language or impulse, etc., it may not be made if it is not directly or indirectly made by the person, other than the person's property status or property status, etc.