The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although the Defendant was frightened to the dog where the victim was raised, the Defendant did not act as a frighter and did not threaten the victim.

B. The sentencing of the lower court on the grounds that the sentencing of an unreasonable sentencing (a fine of KRW 1.5 million) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In light of the circumstances stated in its reasoning, the lower court determined that the Defendant could have acknowledged the facts threatening the victim as stated in the lower judgment’s criminal facts.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning of the lower court in comparison with the evidence examined, the lower court’s fact-finding and judgment are justifiable, and there was no error by misapprehending the facts, thereby adversely affecting the judgment.

B. The Defendant did not have the record of criminal punishment after around 1986, and the victim did not want to punish the Defendant.

However, the defendant committed a crime using each item, which is a dangerous object.

In full view of the following circumstances, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, motive, background, means and consequence of the crime, etc., and the fact that there are no special circumstances or changes in circumstances that may change the sentencing of the lower court after the crime, the lower court’s sentencing is not unfair.

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is groundless.