logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2015.02.06 2014노4306
협박
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In light of the legal principles and the mistake of facts, the defendant did not have the intention of threatening the victim due to the content certification of this case, and its content also constitutes intimidation. Therefore, the judgment below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as to

B. In order to respond to the harmful act by the victim, the defendant merely sent the certification of the content of this case, which constitutes self-defense.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles or misconception of facts.

C. The penalty of the lower judgment on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing (fine 1,500,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In light of the legal principles and the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, it can be recognized that the defendant sent the victim a proof of the content that "B's above criminal act satisfies the requirements for the formation of the crime (the establishment of the crime) and thus, B will file a complaint one time each by classifying the crime by item of the crime, and B will not go beyond the front of the lifelong prosecutor's office." The above expression is a threat of harm sufficient to cause fear to the victim. In light of the motive, specific contents and method of expression, relationship between the defendant and the victim, and the process of dispute, etc. at the time, it can be sufficiently recognized that the defendant had the intention of intimidation. Thus, the court below's judgment convicting the defendant of the facts charged of the crime of this case is acceptable, and this part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.

B. We examine the determination of the assertion of self-defense, and, if an act is to be recognized as self-defense, the act is one’s own act or another’s act.

arrow