The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and three months.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. (1) Defendant (1) misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles did not constitute an element of a crime of intimidation as stated in paragraph (3) of the facts constituting a crime of intimidation, and at the same time, Defendant did not have the purpose of retaliation against Defendant G.

(2) The sentence of the lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the Prosecutor is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. The ex officio judgment prosecutor applied for amendments to the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes to the effect that while maintaining the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes among the facts charged in the instant case, the prosecutor added the facts charged with interference with business and the provisions applicable to the Act preliminaryly, and the judgment of the court below cannot be upheld

3. Determination of misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles: Provided, That the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles is still subject to adjudication by the Korean court, and this is examined.

(a) In the relevant legal doctrine (1) a intimidation means a threat of harm that would normally cause fear to an ordinary person, and a threat of harm to an extent that it would be likely to cause fear should be at least possible for a crime to be committed.

On the other hand, the subjective element of the crime of intimidation lies in recognizing that the perpetrator is aware of such a degree of harm and injury, and it does not need the intent or desire to actually realize the harm and injury. However, even if the notice of harm and injury is given, it is merely an expression of a perpetrator’s speech and behavior to the extent acceptable by social norms in light of social customs, ethics, etc., or merely a mere emotional expression or temporary decentralization. In light of the surrounding circumstances, the perpetrator’s intent is an expression of harm and injury.