The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The gist of the grounds of appeal is that the victim first sent various intimidation messages to the defendant, his father, and his father, and that the Defendant sent the Defendant’s message while referring to the content of the Defendant’s message as it is, and thus, the message sent by the Defendant did not cause fear or apprehension of the victim. In addition, sending the Defendant’s message to the victim constitutes a legitimate defense or legitimate act.

2. The following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court, namely, ① the victim sent the Defendant a message recommending the Kakao Stockholm game first.

Even if there was a face to induce the instant crime, and the Defendant’s message sent to the purport that “not to demand a fine,” or “to demand a fine on the Defendant’s message,” the Defendant had actively and repeatedly transmitted the Defendant’s message to the victim without any time even on the day the victim attempted or did not respond thereto. ② The message sent by the Defendant to the victim includes a large number of abusives, such as “Cune,” “filch,” “filch,” “find,” and “human garbage,” and in particular, each of the messages sent to the Defendant, “a suicide” is not any more.

(a) Murder;

“.............. the Defendant’s father: ③ the victim sent a majority of the text messages containing excessive expressions to F, who is the Defendant’s father;

Even if the victim sent the victim’s message to D and F, the time when the Defendant sent the victim’s message, and the content of each of the instant messages, etc., it is difficult to see that the Defendant resisted the victim to commit the above act, and if the victim’s above act constitutes a crime, D and F are the victim.