The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, as indicated in the facts charged, did not have any 300,000 won in cash from the injured party G, the president of the F 11 construction site, for the victim G, who was the president of the F 11 construction site, to realize environmental issues at the above construction site or to file a complaint with the competent authority.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (one million won in penalty) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged is the representative director and news gathering director of the Internet broadcasting private person’s “C broadcasting (C broadcasting)” from around 2014.

The defendant found a construction site that is environmentally vulnerable to the environment by using the identity of the reporter, and caused the crypation of the environmental issues at the construction site as if he/she reported or accused the environmental issues at the construction site.

On June 1, 2015, the Defendant, at the 111 construction site office built by E Co., Ltd. in Gyeongnam-gun, G (46 tax), the site warden, “I am back to the site of the warden, so I am about how you want to look back to the site of the warden.

I amblish I will do.

“Along with the construction site at the above site,” it was delivered KRW 300,000 in cash to the victims of drinking waste, by means of inserting the environmental issue or filing a complaint with the competent authority.

Accordingly, the Defendant received property from the injured party by threatening the injured party.

B. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged on the basis of each of the evidence indicated in its judgment.

(c)

1) In a criminal trial, the burden of proof for the facts constituting an offense charged is imposed on the prosecutor, and the conviction is based on the evidence with probative value sufficient for a judge to have a reasonable doubt that the facts charged are true, so if there is no such evidence, the defendant is guilty.