The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 6,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) misunderstanding of the legal principles (the point of intimidation) agreed on all of the crimes of victim E, F, and Intimidation and submitted a written agreement to the court below. Although the court below's dismissal decision on the crime of intimidation, which constitutes a crime of non-compliance with the intention of the victim, the court below erred in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the scope and effect of the agreement, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2) At the time of each of the instant crimes, the Defendant was in a state of mental disorder by drinking.

3) The sentence that the lower court sentenced to an unfair sentencing (an amount of KRW 7,000,000) is too unreasonable.

B. The above sentence declared by the prosecutor by the court below is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the misapprehension of the legal principle of the defendant

A. A. Around July 3, 2016, the summary of the charge of intimidation, among the facts charged in the instant case, the Defendant: (a) around July 3, 2016, at the investigation of the Cheongju District Police Station, located in 60, Goju-gun, the Gu office of the J Team, reported himself at the investigation of the Cheongju District Police Station, and (b) the victim E and F, who reported himself at the J Team office of the Cheongju-gun, the Defendant: (c) was not fluort, and (d) was fluort, and (d)

B. The judgment of this part of the facts charged is a crime falling under Article 283(1) of the Criminal Act and cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s express intent pursuant to Article 283(3) of the Criminal Act. According to the records, the defendant submitted a self-agreement to the court below on May 4, 2017 with the victim E and F’s name on April 22, 2017. The defendant submitted the agreement to the court below on April 22, 2017. ② The phrase “the contents of the agreement” column in the above agreement was “the above reporters (the defendant and the victims)” around 00:00 on July 3, 2016. It was mutually agreed to the injury case at the convenience store D located in the Cheongju-si, the petitioner would not be held liable for the late civil and criminal liability.

The facts stated “,” and ③ Meanwhile, the Defendant rendered the original judgment at the above time and place.