The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. As to the (i) a misunderstanding of facts against the victim G, the Defendant got coverage under the direction of the Director-General of Q. F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “F”) at the time. The victim voluntarily requested the advertisement at the advertisement cost and deposited this money into F at the advertisement cost, and there was no fact that the victim paid the money from the victim, such as indicated in the facts charged, with the advertisement cost.

The Defendant introduced the company from the person in the relationship with the official office of the government of the government of the government of the government of the government of the government of the government of the government of the government of the government of the government of the government of the government of the government of the government of the government of the government of the government of the government of the government of the government of the government of the government of the government of the government of the government of the government of the government of the government of the Republic of Korea.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (two years of suspended sentence in October) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination:

A. In full view of the following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts, the defendant took an attitude that the defendant would cause harm to the victim if he did not give money as stated in this part of the facts charged, and sufficiently recognized the fact that he received money from the victim of frightage, so this part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.

(1) The victim had no choice but to pay money in an investigative agency because "the defendant found and discussed as stated in the facts charged, the defendant filed a civil petition and the article was suspended if the article was written."

“The Defendant made a statement to the effect that “” was stated in the court of original instance, and “The Defendant first changed the money.”

“The Defendant made a statement to the effect that “...... the design Director J and the victim took part in the above facts from the injured party.”